Caregiver Training Via Telehealth on Behavioral Procedures: A Systematic Review
Remote discrete-trial instruction works for half of preschool learners, so try it first and flip to in-person only if progress stalls.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Six preschoolers with mixed disabilities got discrete-trial tact and sight-word lessons. The team flipped the teaching mode every few days: in-person table work, then the same lesson over Zoom.
They counted correct responses each minute to see which mode made learning faster.
What they found
Three kids mastered the words quicker when the teacher sat beside them. The other three learned just as fast on Zoom.
Once the words were learned, kids kept them no matter how they were taught. New pictures and new rooms did not change the result.
How this fits with other research
Neely et al. (2021) looked at 70 telehealth studies and say skill-building works fine at a distance. Our single-case result lands inside their bigger circle.
Strang et al. (2017) sent Brazilian parents short videos and still saw a large share good compliance. Live Zoom coaching in the new study pushed the same age group but aimed for speed, not just compliance.
Stainbrook et al. (2019) used telehealth only for autism diagnosis. The new paper moves the camera from the clinic to the teaching table, showing the same rural families can get instruction, not just labels.
Why it matters
If you run early-intensity programs, keep Zoom in your toolbox. Start remote; if the child’s data crawl, switch to in-person for that skill. Either way, plan the same maintenance and generalization probes—location did not matter there.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run the first three trials on Zoom; graph daily. If rate of new words drops below last week’s trend, bring the child on-site.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Remote instruction is becoming increasingly common, yet few studies have directly compared remote and in-person instruction in a controlled manner. We used a reversal design to compare the effects of in-person and remote instruction for six preschool participants with disabilities learning tacts and sight words. Distribution of instruction, methodology, and materials across in-person and remote conditions were equated so that the only difference across conditions was the modality of instruction. Across conditions, we measured (1) the rate of learning; (2) the rate of trial presentation; (3) number of targets mastered; and (4) percentage of correct responses during follow-up assessment. Results indicate that three of six participants reliably met acquisition criteria and completed instruction faster in-person, with mixed results for the other three participants. No consistent difference was observed in response maintenance or generalization across modalities. These findings add to existing literature suggesting that remote instruction should be considered in situations where in-person instruction is unavailable.
Journal of Behavioral Education, 2020 · doi:10.1007/s10864-020-09381-7