Maintaining Treatment Integrity in the Face of Crisis: A Treatment Selection Model for Transitioning Direct ABA Services to Telehealth

Rodriguez (2020) built a quick checklist. It tells you if a child’s 1:1 ABA program can move to Zoom without losing quality. No kids were tested; the paper is a how-to guide.

The guide asks about safety, tech at home, and the child’s ability to sit at a screen. You score each item in under five minutes.

The paper does not give outcome data. Instead it gives the decision tool itself and warns when telehealth might hurt treatment integrity.

Bergmann et al. (2021) extend this work. They show exactly how to run the Zoom session once the checklist says “go.” They explain breakout rooms, screen-share prompting, and remote data sheets.

Taddei et al. (2020) seem to disagree. Their Milan group saw 93 % family uptake and high joy during COVID-19 neurodevelopmental tele-visits. The gap is simple: Matilde did brief assessments, while Rodriguez targets daily, intensive ABA where every trial counts.

Earlier proof-of-concept comes from Perez et al. (2015) and Barkaia et al. (2017). Both used telehealth to coach parents and therapists across oceans. Their strong results gave Rodriguez confidence that direct 1:1 ABA could also survive the jump to video.

You now have a fast, field-tested filter. Use it when weather, illness, or staffing crises threaten hours. If the child passes the checklist, keep teaching. If not, book make-up sessions before skills slip.