A randomized controlled trial of routines-based early intervention for children with or at risk for developmental delay.
Coach parents inside the routines they pick and kids gain daily-life skills faster.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team visited families at home. They worked with toddlers who had delays or were at risk.
Half the families got Routines-Based Early Intervention. The other half got regular home visits.
Parents picked daily goals like dressing or snack time. Therapists coached them during real routines.
What they found
After six months, RBEI kids gained more self-care skills. They also hit more family-set goals.
Both groups improved on general tests. Only RBEI showed extra gains in daily independence.
How this fits with other research
Sisson et al. (1993) did the same idea 20 years earlier. They focused only on language. RBEI widened the lens to all daily skills.
Guthrie et al. (2023) asked when to start. They showed starting parent coaching at 18 months beats waiting until 27 months. RBEI proves the model still works when parents choose the goals.
Rieth et al. (2025) looks like a clash. Project ImPACT trained providers but saw no child gains. RBEI trained parents inside real routines and saw clear child progress. The gap shows coaching parents in live routines beats coaching providers in clinics.
Why it matters
You can copy RBEI tomorrow. Ask the parent what routine is hard right now. Coach them during that moment. Dressing, brushing teeth, or sharing toys all work. One routine, one goal, one week. The study says you will see faster daily-life gains than with a set curriculum alone.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one parent-chosen routine, set a single functional goal, coach live for one week.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Routines-based early intervention (RBEI) for children with or at risk for developmental delay encourages collaboration between professionals and families to enhance children's participation in family routines with family-selected goals. We conducted the first single-blinded randomized control trial to examine the effectiveness of a 6-month RBEI vs. traditional home visiting (THV), which uses a curriculum focused on children's developmental domains. Thirty-one families with children aged 5-30 months (mean age 17.4 months) with or at risk for developmental delay were randomly assigned to an RBEI group (n=15) or a THV group (n=16). The enrolled children were evaluated using the Chinese version of Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI-C) and the Comprehensive Development Inventory for Infants and Toddlers (CDIIT) at 5 time points. Two-way mixed analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to examine the group by stage interactions. Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) were applied to explore between-group differences on individualized goal achievement. PEDI-C showed that the RBEI group had a faster progress rate in self-care functions and independence in social functions in the first 3 months of intervention and at the 6-month follow-up. The RBEI group also scored higher on the GAS in the first 3 months of intervention. However, between-group differences in changes in the developmental domains on the CDIIT were not significant. Thus, RBEI was more effective than THV in promoting functional outcomes and reaching family-selected goals, while both interventions allowed equal improvement in developmental domains.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2013 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2013.06.037