Comparison of a Self-Directed and Therapist-Assisted Telehealth Parent-Mediated Intervention for Children with ASD: A Pilot RCT.

Ingersoll et al. (2016) ran a small randomized trial with preschoolers with autism. They compared two ways to train parents over video chat.

One group watched recorded lessons on their own. The other group got the same lessons plus a live coach who gave feedback. Both groups practiced the same social-communication strategies with their kids at home.

Parents who had a live coach used the teaching steps more correctly. Their kids also showed bigger gains in social skills.

The self-directed group still improved, just not as much. The study shows that real-time coaching adds value even through a screen.

Hao et al. (2021) later found that telehealth and in-person parent training give equal child gains. Brooke’s study explains part of that success: the live coach matters.

Gerow et al. (2021) and Ferguson et al. (2022) extended the model to daily living skills and verbal operants. They also saw high parent fidelity, showing the coach effect holds across goals.

Yi et al. (2021) looked like a contradiction: public early-intervention staff used low-quality coaching online. The difference is setting. Brooke’s coaches were research staff with tight scripts; Yi studied real-world providers who lacked training. Same screen, different support.

If you run parent training through Zoom, add live feedback. Recorded modules alone are cheaper, but a 15-minute coach check-in lifts fidelity and child outcomes. Use bug-in-ear or video review so parents leave the call doing the steps right.