Protective procedures in functional analysis of self‐injurious behavior: An updated scoping review

Abstract

AbstractDespite the efficacy of functional analyses in identifying the function of challenging behavior, clinicians report not always using them, partly due to safety concerns. Understanding how researchers employ safeguards to mitigate risks, particularly with dangerous topographies like self‐injurious behavior (SIB), is important to guide research and practice. However, the results of a scoping review of functional analyses of self‐injurious behavior conducted by Weeden et al. (2010) revealed that only 19.83% of publications included protections. We extended the work of Weeden et al. to determine whether reporting has improved. We observed increases in all but two types of protections reviewed by Weeden et al. Additionally, we included new protections not reported by Weeden et al. In total, 69.52% of the studies included at least one protective procedure and 44.39% specified that the protections were used for safety. It appears that reporting has increased since Weeden et al. called for improved descriptions of participant protections.