TY - JOUR

T1 - Quality Indicators for Reporting Research in PECS (Picture Exchange Communication System): The Guidelines for Reporting Research Interventions in PECS (GRRIP) Checklist

AU - Paris, Andreas

AU - Grindle, Corinna

AU - Denne, Louise

AU - May, Richard

AU - Hastings, Richard

PY - 2021/2/19

Y1 - 2021/2/19

N2 - Poor quality of reporting interventions in research is a widespread issue. Paris et al. reported that important features of Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) interventions are also not systematically reported in published literature. At present, there is no reporting checklist to guide researchers and authors to improve their reporting of PECS interventions. In the present study, we report the development and pilot testing of the Guidelines to Reporting Research Interventions in PECS (GRRIP) checklist, which includes 26 criteria covering seven different domains: a) context; b) reinforcer assessment; c) intervention characteristics; d) PECS intervention; e) intervention fidelity; f) implementer training; and g) social validity. A total of 40 studies were rated using the GRRIP. The average quality score was found to be 57.3%. The least reported themes included the contextual fit; stakeholder views and experiences; implementer characteristics and PECS training; PECS specific supervision/support offered; and the generalisation procedure criteria. Future use of the GRRIP checklist is discussed.

AB - Poor quality of reporting interventions in research is a widespread issue. Paris et al. reported that important features of Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) interventions are also not systematically reported in published literature. At present, there is no reporting checklist to guide researchers and authors to improve their reporting of PECS interventions. In the present study, we report the development and pilot testing of the Guidelines to Reporting Research Interventions in PECS (GRRIP) checklist, which includes 26 criteria covering seven different domains: a) context; b) reinforcer assessment; c) intervention characteristics; d) PECS intervention; e) intervention fidelity; f) implementer training; and g) social validity. A total of 40 studies were rated using the GRRIP. The average quality score was found to be 57.3%. The least reported themes included the contextual fit; stakeholder views and experiences; implementer characteristics and PECS training; PECS specific supervision/support offered; and the generalisation procedure criteria. Future use of the GRRIP checklist is discussed.

M3 - Article

JO - Augmentative and Alternative Communication

JF - Augmentative and Alternative Communication

SN - 1477-3848

ER -