Comparison of the Effectiveness of Online and Face-to-Face Parent Training for Parents of Children With Developmental Disabilities
Real-time online parent training works as well as in-person sessions for reducing child behavior problems and parent stress.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers compared two ways to teach parents. One group met online through live video. The other group met in person.
All 42 parents had kids with developmental delays. The online group joined weekly Zoom classes. The in-person group met in a clinic.
Both groups learned the same skills. They practiced giving clear instructions and using rewards. The study lasted eight weeks.
What they found
Kids in the online group had a large share fewer big behavior problems. Kids in the face-to-face group had similar gains.
Parents in both groups felt less stress. Online parents actually reported slightly lower stress scores.
Both groups liked the training. Online parents said they saved driving time and could join from work.
How this fits with other research
Spackman et al. (2025) found even bigger wins. Their telehealth coaching cut behavior problems by a large share. The difference? Emily's team coached parents one-on-one to run full functional analyses. Anonymous (2024) used group classes without FA.
Liao et al. (2025) shows the model works in Taiwan too. Their telehealth coaching helped parents of school-age kids with autism. This extends Anonymous's findings beyond Western families.
Schieltz et al. (2022) adds global proof. They used telehealth to deliver FA+FCT to the families worldwide. Like Anonymous, they saw strong parent satisfaction and child gains. The pattern holds across cultures.
Why it matters
You can now offer parent training without traffic jams or parking fees. Start with group Zoom sessions. If a family needs more help, shift to one-on-one coaching like Spackman et al. (2025). This gives you a clear stepped-care model that saves time and reaches more families.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Send your next parent group a Zoom link instead of a clinic address
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Background: Parent training (PT) is an effective intervention for improving children's behavioral problems and enhancing parental mental health in those caring for children with developmental disabilities (DD). Recent studies report the effectiveness of online PT (ON-PT). ON-PT encompasses both the on-demand type and the real-time type, which involves real-time online group PT delivered through web conferencing systems. However, the efficacy of the on-demand type has been established through comparisons with face-to-face PT (F2F-PT), whereas the real-time type of ON-PT has been assessed exclusively in single-arm studies, underscoring the need for comparative analyses with F2F-PT to validate its effectiveness. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of the real-time type of ON-PT and F2F-PT for parents of children with DD using a retrospective study design. Methods: The analysis included data from 13 parent-child pairs in the F2F-PT and 27 parent-child pairs in the ON-PT. Assessment scales included parental depression and stress, evaluated using the Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition (BDI-II) and Parenting Stress Index (PSI), respectively, as well as children's behavioral problems, measured with the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI). A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA assessed the impact of different PT delivery methods and time on the outcome variables. Results: Attendance and dropout rates were similar between ON-PT (82%, 18.7%) and F2F-PT (80.3%, 18.1%). A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA showed that the interaction effect was marginally significant for PSI (p = 0.066) and statistically significant for both the child domain of PSI (p = 0.049) and ECBI (p = 0.013). Simple main effects analysis indicated that pre-test mean scores for PSI (p < 0.001), the child domain of PSI (p = 0.001), and ECBI (p = 0.002) were significantly higher than post-test scores in the ON-PT compared with the F2F-PT. Furthermore, although a higher proportion of participants in the ON-PT were within the clinical range of ECBI at the pre-test (70.4%) compared to the F2F-PT, this proportion decreased to 44.4% at the post-test. Conclusion: This study suggests that ON-PT may be as effective as or potentially more effective than F2F-PT. The adoption of online formats should be considered for families facing challenges, as ON-PT may improve children's behavioral problems and reduce parental stress. Nonetheless, the retrospective study design warrants caution in interpreting the findings, and a future study with a prospective, rigorous validation design will be essential to effectively compare the effectiveness of ON-PT and F2F-PT.
Cureus, 2024 · doi:10.7759/cureus.73895