Visual Schedules and Autism Ranking:

There are a number of limitations to all of the research studies published to date. For example

The overwhelming majority of studies consisted of single-case designs with 6 or fewer participants.
The single group design study was a randomised controlled trial but it had only 14 participants.
Some of the single-case design studies used relatively weak methodologies (such as an ABAB design or convenience samples).
Some of the studies did not provide enough details about the participants, such as whether they had a formal diagnosis of autism, intellectual ability etc.
Some of the studies did not independently verify the diagnosis of autism using established diagnostic tools like the ADOS or ADI-R.
Some of the studies did not examine key aspects of the intervention (such as the role of instruction and reinforcement alongside the use of visual schedules).
Some of the studies did not examine the effectiveness of visual schedules when transitioning from play or free time to more demanding conditions (such as compliance with teacher instructions).
Most of the studies did not identify if visual schedules had any beneficial effects in the medium to long term.
Some of the studies did not identify if visual schedule had any benefits in real world settings.
There are no studies which involved autistic people in the design, development and evaluation of those studies.

For a comprehensive list of potential flaws in research studies, please see ‘Why some autism research studies are flawed’

Rate This Page