Cognitive-Behavioral Group Treatment by Reaven - Article Example

The cohort of study involved thirty-three children that exhibited high levels of ASD. To this end, the participants were enrolled via community-based outreach strategies such as workshops, clinics, schools, newsletters, awareness forums, and parent support groups (Reaven, 2009). As a result, 90 families consented to the research study. However, 54 families were systematically eliminated from the cohort after failing to satisfy the eligibility criteria. Evidently, the eligibility criteria required participants to be aged between 7 and 14 years. Furthermore, they were subjected to a diagnostic analysis on the autism spectrum that exceeded the set criterion of Module 3 on observation (ADOS).

In addition, the participants were expected to be in possession of a clinical record of ASD issued by clinical psychologists. Finally, the eligibility was inclusive of children with a 70+ IQ and verbally fluent. The next procedure involved the participation in assessment questions with the 33 participant families. Evidently, the assessment material included the ‘autism observation schedule’ that evaluated communicative and social behaviors related to autism. In addition, the ‘social communication questionnaire’ was equally used in the assessment. . Another assessment tool was the ‘Screen for Child Anxiety and Related Emotional Disorders (SCARED).

This assessment tool involved a series of 40 inventory statements concordant to five characteristics of anxiety synonymous with children (Reaven, 2009). The next juncture involved the derivation of results based on four categories. Foremost on attrition and participation, a low, attrition rate was recorded from the 31 participants that eventually completed the research study. In addition, results on parent evaluations based on SCARED indicated that children enrolled in the active treatment exhibited less degree in anxiety effects compared to those on the waitlist.

However, the child ratings based on the SCARED report revealed no changes between the two sets of children on the waitlist and active treatment respectively. To this end, the clinical relevance of the symptoms was derived based on the Chi-square analysis of the SCARED tests. As a result, after a Chi analysis of the total scores of parent and child, no clinical classification differences were established on patients with an anxiety disorder or those devoid of the disorder. Moreover, based on Chi-square analysis on the overall sample of pre and post-treatment assessments, significant differences were noticed in the clinical classification of parent reports.

However, no differences were recorded for the child reports. Evidently, the results implied that parents witnessed a decrease in anxiety symptoms after their children participated in the ‘cognitive-behavior group therapy intervention. To this end, the researchers concluded that group behavior treatment was effective in eliminating isolation factors and also stimulating positive, interactive behavior.
Critique

In light of the entire research, the research findings inspired some degree of confidence in the efficacy of group therapy in addressing autism spectrum disorders. Evidently, the research inspired confidence from the backdrop of evidence in past research involving cognitive group therapy. In this respect, past research on CBT revealed concomitant results in its effectiveness as a treatment tool for serious psychiatric conditions. However, it is critical to note that the research had certain flaws that limited its overall objectivity. Foremost, the research utilized 33 participants of which only 31 completed the study. This in effect, represented a low number for the study cohort. Consequently, it limited the ability for a wider spectrum of comparison on the efficacy of cognitive behavior therapy.

The research study equally exhibited some level of generalization in its findings. To this effect, the research indicated that Cognitive Based Therapy could be used in the treating of children with psychiatric problems. However, the research study was based on an eligibility criterion of children between 7 and 14 years. Incidentally, the children age groups between 4 and 6, 15, and 17 were locked out from the study. Consequently, the recommendation of CBT as an intervention therapy was generalized with respect to ‘children’.

The societal implications of the findings indicate that CBT offers an alternative intervention mechanism in the treatment of ASD-related psychiatric systems. More particularly, it will aid in the limitation of anxiety problems that affect the social, interactive behavior of children. In relation to the learning theory, the research employs a group-based interactive intervention in promoting positive, social behavior change. Evidently, the research offers insight into the elimination of anxiety and isolation in children. Consequently, they are in a better capacity to participate in indoor and outdoor learning with their peers.