These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

133 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11214025)

  • 21. Introduction to special section on evidence-based practices for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
    Kaiser AP; McIntyre LL
    Am J Intellect Dev Disabil; 2010 Sep; 115(5):357-63. PubMed ID: 20687821
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Comparison of verbal preference assessments in the presence and absence of the actual stimuli.
    Kuhn DE; DeLeon IG; Terlonge C; Goysovich R
    Res Dev Disabil; 2006; 27(6):645-56. PubMed ID: 16263239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The effects of establishing operations on preferences for tangible items.
    McAdam DB; Klatt KP; Koffarnus M; Dicesare A; Solberg K; Welch C; Murphy S
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2005; 38(1):107-10. PubMed ID: 15898479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Examination of ambiguous stimulus preferences with duration-based measures.
    DeLeon IG; Iwata BA; Conners J; Wallace MD
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1999; 32(1):111-4. PubMed ID: 10201108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Embedded evaluation of preferences sampled from person-centered plans for people with profound multiple disabilities.
    Green CW; Middleton SG; Reid DH
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(4):639-42. PubMed ID: 11214041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The Assessment of Basic Learning Abilities (ABLA) test predicts the relative efficacy of task preferences for persons with developmental disabilities.
    Reyer HS; Sturmey P
    J Intellect Disabil Res; 2006 Jun; 50(Pt 6):404-9. PubMed ID: 16672034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Functional assessment of challenging behavior: toward a strategy for applied settings.
    Matson JL; Minshawi NF
    Res Dev Disabil; 2007; 28(4):353-61. PubMed ID: 16765024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Goodness-of-fit ethic for informed consent to research involving adults with mental retardation and developmental disabilities.
    Fisher CB
    Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev; 2003; 9(1):27-31. PubMed ID: 12587135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Two measures of preference during forced-choice assessments.
    Derby KM; Wacker DP; Andelman M; Berg W; Drew J; Asmus J; Prouty AM; Laffey P
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1995; 28(3):345-6. PubMed ID: 7592152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. An evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment with adolescents with emotional-behavioral disorders in an educational setting.
    Paramore NW; Higbee TS
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2005; 38(3):399-403. PubMed ID: 16270849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Effects of ordinary and adaptive toys on pre-school children with developmental disabilities.
    Hsieh HC
    Res Dev Disabil; 2008; 29(5):459-66. PubMed ID: 17936580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A measure of engagement for children with intellectual disabilities in early childhood settings: a preliminary study.
    Kishida Y; Kemp C
    J Intellect Dev Disabil; 2006 Jun; 31(2):101-14. PubMed ID: 16782595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Reinforcer assessment for children with developmental disabilities and visual impairments.
    Paclawskyj TR; Vollmer TR
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1995; 28(2):219-24. PubMed ID: 7541398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The effects of intellectual functioning on the range of core symptoms of autism spectrum disorders.
    Matson JL; Dempsey T; Lovullo SV; Wilkins J
    Res Dev Disabil; 2008; 29(4):341-50. PubMed ID: 17646082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Context influences preference for and level of physical activity of adolescents with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
    Pincus SM; Hausman NL; Borrero JC; Kahng S
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2019 Jul; 52(3):788-795. PubMed ID: 31161604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Enhancing tolerance to delayed reinforcers: the role of intervening activities.
    Dixon MR; Rehfeldt RA; Randich L
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2003; 36(2):263-6. PubMed ID: 12858992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Further evaluation of low-ranked items in stimulus-choice preference assessments.
    Taravella CC; Lerman DC; Contrucci SA; Roane HS
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2000; 33(1):105-8. PubMed ID: 10738960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Revision and validation of the Individual Child Engagement Record: a practitioner-friendly measure of learning opportunities for children with disabilities in early childhood settings.
    Kishida Y; Kemp C; Carter M
    J Intellect Dev Disabil; 2008 Jun; 33(2):158-70. PubMed ID: 18569403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Persons with multiple disabilities accessing stimulation and requesting social contact via microswitch and VOCA devices: new research evaluation and social validation.
    Lancioni GE; O'Reilly MF; Singh NN; Sigafoos J; Didden R; Oliva D; Campodonico F; de Pace C; Chiapparino C; Groeneweg J
    Res Dev Disabil; 2009; 30(5):1084-94. PubMed ID: 19361954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. An evaluation of specialized community-based residential supports for people with challenging behaviour.
    Golding L; Emerson E; Thornton A
    J Intellect Disabil; 2005 Jun; 9(2):145-54. PubMed ID: 15937052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.