↓ Skip to main content

A Comprehensive Literature Review of Comprehension Strategies in Core Content Areas for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
191 Mendeley
Title
A Comprehensive Literature Review of Comprehension Strategies in Core Content Areas for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Published in
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, October 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10803-014-2280-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Victoria F. Knight, Emily Sartini

Abstract

Understanding text can increase access to educational, vocational, and recreational activities for individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD); however, limited research has been conducted investigating instructional practices to remediate or compensate for these comprehension challenges. The current comprehensive literature review expanded previous reviews and evaluated research quality using Reichow (Evidence-based practices and treatments for children with autism, pp 25-39. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-6975-0_2 , 2011) criteria for identifying evidence-based practices. Three questions guided the review: (a) Which approaches to comprehension instruction have been investigated for students with ASD?; (b) Have there been a sufficient number of acceptable studies using a particular strategy to qualify as an evidence-based practice for teaching comprehension across the content areas?; and (c) What can educators learn from the analysis of high quality studies? Of the 23 studies included in the review, only 13 achieved high or adequate ratings. Results of the review suggest that both response-prompting procedures (e.g., model-lead-test, time delay, system of least prompts,) and visual supports (e.g., procedural facilitators) can increase comprehension skills in content areas of ELA, math, and science. Authors conclude with a discussion of (a) research-based examples of how to use effective approaches, (b) implications for practitioners, and (c) limitations and future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 191 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 189 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 19%
Student > Master 27 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 11%
Student > Bachelor 18 9%
Researcher 12 6%
Other 22 12%
Unknown 55 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 46 24%
Psychology 36 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Arts and Humanities 11 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 4%
Other 17 9%
Unknown 62 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 October 2014.
All research outputs
#14,963,173
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#3,523
of 5,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,156
of 273,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#63
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 273,681 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.