[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"problem-behavior\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:problem-behavior":25},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,8,0,[8,46,82,106,126,145,175,199],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":13,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":14,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":15,"minAge":16,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":17,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":20,"phases":21,"briefSummary":23,"conditions":24,"keywords":27,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":34,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":35,"startDateStruct":38,"completionDateStruct":40,"leadSponsor":42,"locationsCount":45},"100591775","evaluation-of-the-invest-in-play-program---a-new-parent-intervention-for-children-with-problem-behavior-100591775",false,"NCT06984809","Evaluation of the Invest in Play Program - a New Parent Intervention for Children With Problem Behavior","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Parents of children between 6-12 years of age referred to out-patient clinics for treatment of behavioural problems.\n* Children scoring above a pre-defined mean cut off score (over the 90 percentile) on the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI; Eyberg \\& Ross, 1978) based on Norwegian norms (Reedtz et al., 2008), as reported by parents.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n\\- Severe developmental delay (in children or parents), autism spectrum disorder, inability to understand Norwegian, or other reasons why the parent(s) are not expected to benefit from group therapy.","ALL","18 Years",{"count":18,"type":19},180,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[22],"NA","The goal of this clinical trial is to test if the invest in Play (iiP) parent program can reduce problem behaviors in children and improve parenting practices in families with children who show challenging behaviors. The main questions it aims to answer is:\n\n• Does the iiP program reduce children's problem behaviors?\n\nResearchers will compare families in the iiP program to families in a control group to see if the program leads to better outcomes for children and parents.\n\nParticipants will be randomly assigned to either the iiP program group or the control group and complete surveys before and after the program to see if iiP is reducing children's problem behaviors.",[25,26],"Problem Behavior","Attention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders",[28,29,30,31,32],"parent intervention","parent practices","emotion regulation","parent-child relationship","parental attributions","RECRUITING","2026-06-26",{"date":36,"type":37},"2026-06-29","ACTUAL",{"date":39,"type":37},"2025-09-25",{"date":41,"type":19},"2028-12",{"name":43,"class":44},"University of Tromso","OTHER",5,{"id":47,"slug":48,"hasResults":11,"nctId":49,"briefTitle":50,"officialTitle":51,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":52,"healthyVolunteers":53,"sex":15,"minAge":16,"maxAge":54,"enrollmentInfo":55,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":57,"phases":4,"briefSummary":58,"conditions":59,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":71,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":72,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":73,"startDateStruct":75,"completionDateStruct":77,"leadSponsor":79,"locationsCount":81},"100640122","exploration-of-acceptability-of-alcohol-interventions-100640122","NCT07580378","Exploration of Acceptability of Alcohol Interventions","A Mixed-methods Study Exploring the Acceptability of Psychosocial Interventions and Social Determinants of Engagement With an NHS-led Alcohol Care Service.","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Clinical staff who worked in the ELHT alcohol care service, and received training in the delivery of psychosocial interventions using the ITEP Manual, and who are still employed by ELHT in other roles (following de-commissioning of the alcohol care service).\n* Patient data under part 2 of the study, who have not opted to have their data removed, in accordance with the NHS MESH, opt out scheme.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Clinical staff who worked in the ELHT alcohol care service, but who no longer work for the trust, or are retired.\n* Clinical staff who did not receive training in the delivery of psychosocial interventions.\n* Any patient data under part 2 of the study, who have opted to have their data removed for use, under the NHS MESH protocols.",true,"67 Years",{"count":56,"type":19},2000,"OBSERVATIONAL","This is a mixed-methods study consisting of a qualitative assessment the acceptability of psychosocial interventions, delivered by clinical staff. The study will also investigate the correlation between demographic variables and engagement with a North West England, NHS-led, alcohol care service, amongst the patient population.",[60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,25],"Alcohol Misuse","Alcohol Use Disorder","Behaviour Change","Health Behaviour","Brief Intervention","Outcome Assessment","Social Determinants of Health","Psychosocial Intervention","Socioeconomic Factors","Primary Healthcare","Primary Heath Care","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-05-05",{"date":74,"type":37},"2026-05-12",{"date":76,"type":19},"2026-05-01",{"date":78,"type":19},"2026-06-10",{"name":80,"class":44},"East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust",1,{"id":83,"slug":84,"hasResults":11,"nctId":85,"briefTitle":86,"officialTitle":86,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":87,"healthyVolunteers":53,"sex":15,"minAge":88,"maxAge":89,"enrollmentInfo":90,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":20,"phases":92,"briefSummary":93,"conditions":94,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":97,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":98,"startDateStruct":100,"completionDateStruct":102,"leadSponsor":104,"locationsCount":81},"100510577","manualized-assessment-and-treatment-model-of-challenging-behavior-100510577","NCT05928247","Manualized Assessment and Treatment Model of Challenging Behavior","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. children from ages 3 to 17;\n2. challenging behavior that occurs at least 10 times a day, despite previous treatment;\n3. challenging behavior maintained by social positive or automatic reinforcement;\n4. stable protective supports for self-injurious behavior (e.g., helmet) with no anticipated changes during enrollment;\n5. on a stable psychoactive drug regimen for at least 10 half-lives per drug or drug free;\n6. stable educational plan and placement with no anticipated changes during the child's treatment.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. patients who do not meet the inclusion criteria;\n2. patients currently receiving 15 or more hours per week of treatment for their challenging behavior;\n3. DSM-5 diagnosis of Rett syndrome or other degenerative conditions (e.g., inborn error of metabolism);\n4. a comorbid health condition or major mental disorder that would interfere with study participation;\n5. occurrence of self-injury during study assessments that presents a risk of serious or permanent harm (e.g., detached retinas) based on our routine clinical-risk assessment (Betz, 2011);\n6. patients requiring changes to protective supports for self-injury or drug treatment, but the investigators will invite these patients to participate when protective supports and drug regimen are stable.","3 Years","17 Years",{"count":91,"type":19},30,[22],"Despite decades of mounting single-case-design evidence for the efficacy of applied behavior analysis (ABA) and other approaches for the assessment and treatment of challenging behavior, an evidence-based comprehensive approach remains to exist. The current study will collect test the efficacy of a standardized manual for assessing and treating challenging behavior for individuals with severe and mild challenging behavior.",[25,95,96],"Aggression","Self-Injury","2026-05-04",{"date":99,"type":37},"2026-05-08",{"date":101,"type":19},"2026-12-31",{"date":103,"type":19},"2027-12-31",{"name":105,"class":44},"Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey",{"id":107,"slug":108,"hasResults":11,"nctId":109,"briefTitle":110,"officialTitle":110,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":111,"healthyVolunteers":53,"sex":15,"minAge":88,"maxAge":89,"enrollmentInfo":112,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":20,"phases":114,"briefSummary":115,"conditions":116,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":118,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":119,"startDateStruct":121,"completionDateStruct":123,"leadSponsor":125,"locationsCount":81},"100510335","basic-and-applied-research-on-extinction-bursts-100510335","NCT05925101","Basic and Applied Research on Extinction Bursts","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. children aged 3 to 17;\n2. problem behavior that occurs at least 10 times a day, despite previous treatment;\n3. problem behavior maintained by social positive reinforcement;\n4. stable protective supports for self-injurious behavior (e.g., helmet) with no anticipated changes during enrollment;\n5. on a stable psychoactive drug regimen for at least 10 half-lives per drug or drug free;\n6. stable educational plan and placement with no anticipated changes during the child's treatment.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. patients currently receiving 15 or more hours per week of treatment for their problem behavior;\n2. DSM-5 diagnosis of Rett syndrome or other degenerative conditions (e.g., inborn error of metabolism);\n3. a comorbid health condition or major mental disorder that would interfere with study participation;\n4. occurrence of self-injury during study assessments that presents a risk of serious or permanent harm (e.g., detached retinas) based on our routine clinical-risk assessment;\n5. patients requiring changes to protective supports for self-injury or drug treatment, but we will invite these patients to participate when protective supports and drug regimen are stable.",{"count":113,"type":19},40,[22],"Although highly effective, treatments like FCT include extinction, which can have adverse side effects. The extinction burst, an increase in the frequency or intensity of destructive behavior at the start of treatment, is the most common side effect of extinction, and can increase the risk of harm to the patient and others. The goal of the current study is to evaluate the prevalence of extinction bursts when various parameters of reinforcement (i.e., rate, magnitude, quality) are manipulated.",[25,95,117],"Self Injury","2026-04-28",{"date":120,"type":37},"2026-04-29",{"date":122,"type":37},"2023-07-07",{"date":124,"type":19},"2028-05-31",{"name":105,"class":44},{"id":127,"slug":128,"hasResults":11,"nctId":129,"briefTitle":130,"officialTitle":131,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":132,"healthyVolunteers":53,"sex":15,"minAge":88,"maxAge":89,"enrollmentInfo":133,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":20,"phases":134,"briefSummary":135,"conditions":136,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":137,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":138,"startDateStruct":140,"completionDateStruct":142,"leadSponsor":144,"locationsCount":81},"100480563","extensions-of-resurgence-as-choice-100480563","NCT05537610","Extensions of Resurgence as Choice","Extensions of Resurgence as Choice: Basic and Clinical Studies","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. boys and girls from ages 3 to 17;\n2. problem behavior that occurs at least 10 times a day, despite previous treatment;\n3. problem behavior maintained by social positive reinforcement;\n4. stable protective supports for self-injurious behavior (e.g., helmet) with no anticipated changes during enrollment;\n5. on a stable psychoactive drug regimen for at least 10 half-lives per drug or drug free;\n6. stable educational plan and placement with no anticipated changes during the child's treatment.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. patients who do not meet the inclusion criteria;\n2. patients currently receiving 15 or more hours per week of treatment for their problem behavior;\n3. DSM-5 diagnosis of Rett syndrome or other degenerative conditions (e.g., inborn error of metabolism);\n4. a comorbid health condition or major mental disorder that would interfere with study participation;\n5. occurrence of self-injury during study assessments that presents a risk of serious or permanent harm (e.g., detached retinas) based on our routine clinical-risk assessment;\n6. patients requiring changes to protective supports for self-injury or drug treatment, but we will invite these patients to participate when protective supports and drug regimen are stable.",{"count":91,"type":19},[22],"Although behavioral treatments for decreasing destructive behavior, such as differential reinforcement of alternative behavior (DRA), are effective in the clinic, problem behavior often returns when a caregiver does not give the child their way in the natural environment (e.g., caregiver is busy with an infant sibling). This form of treatment relapse is known as resurgence. The goal of the current study is to evaluate whether alternating sessions in which the child can have their way (i.e., \"on\" sessions) with sessions in which the child can not have their way (i.e., \"off\" sessions) helps to mitigate resurgence.",[25,95,96],"2026-04-14",{"date":139,"type":37},"2026-04-17",{"date":141,"type":37},"2023-02-01",{"date":143,"type":19},"2028-01-31",{"name":105,"class":44},{"id":146,"slug":147,"hasResults":11,"nctId":148,"briefTitle":149,"officialTitle":150,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":151,"healthyVolunteers":53,"sex":15,"minAge":152,"maxAge":153,"enrollmentInfo":154,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":20,"phases":156,"briefSummary":157,"conditions":158,"keywords":161,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":166,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":167,"startDateStruct":169,"completionDateStruct":171,"leadSponsor":173,"locationsCount":81},"100575361","problem-behavior-assessment-and-intervention-in-idea-part-c-services-100575361","NCT06771284","Problem Behavior Assessment and Intervention in IDEA Part C Services","Problem Behavior Assessment and Intervention in IDEA Part C Services: A Single-Case Study","Child Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* age birth to 5 years old\n* has a developmental disability or delay based on caregiver report and\u002For receiving early intervention services\n* has problem behavior, as reported by the caregiver and\u002For early intervention professional\n\nCaregivers (e.g., parent, grandparent) of eligible child participants will participate with their child as the implementer of all procedures.\n\nAn early intervention professional will participate with each caregiver-child dyad to coach the caregiver, in addition to the researcher.","0 Months","5 Years",{"count":155,"type":19},9,[22],"The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of function-based assessment and intervention to reduce problem behavior in children with developmental disability or delay in the context of IDEA Part C services. The investigators will conduct a single-case study to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention.",[25,159,160],"Developmental Delay","Developmental Disability",[162,163,164,165],"Early childhood","Problem behavior","Home-based services","IDEA Part C services","2026-01-20",{"date":168,"type":37},"2026-01-22",{"date":170,"type":37},"2025-09-30",{"date":172,"type":19},"2027-05",{"name":174,"class":44},"University of Nevada, Las Vegas",{"id":176,"slug":177,"hasResults":11,"nctId":178,"briefTitle":179,"officialTitle":180,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":181,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":15,"minAge":182,"maxAge":183,"enrollmentInfo":184,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":20,"phases":186,"briefSummary":187,"conditions":188,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":189,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":190,"startDateStruct":192,"completionDateStruct":194,"leadSponsor":196,"locationsCount":198},"100566163","preventing-relapse-of-problem-behavior-through-behavioral-economics-a-translational-analysis-100566163","NCT06651606","Preventing Relapse of Problem Behavior Through Behavioral Economics: A Translational Analysis","Using Behavioral Economics to Mitigate Relapse of Problem Behavior in an Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Population","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Boys and girls from ages 6 to 21\n* Engage in problem behavior\n* Diagnosis of some type of intellectual and developmental disability\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Not meeting the inclusion criteria","6 Years","21 Years",{"count":185,"type":19},24,[22],"The goal of this clinical trial is to compare a novel tactic for mitigating reinstatement compared to the current standard of care approach using a translational-treatment model. The main questions it aims to answer are:\n\n1. how well does progressive ratio training mitigate response-dependent reinstatement compared to the standard of care approach?\n2. how well does progressive ratio training mitigate response-independent reinstatement compared to the standard of care approach?",[25],"2025-08-15",{"date":191,"type":37},"2025-08-21",{"date":193,"type":37},"2024-09-30",{"date":195,"type":19},"2026-09-10",{"name":197,"class":44},"Oakland University",2,{"id":200,"slug":201,"hasResults":11,"nctId":202,"briefTitle":203,"officialTitle":204,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":205,"healthyVolunteers":53,"sex":15,"minAge":206,"maxAge":207,"enrollmentInfo":208,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":20,"phases":210,"briefSummary":212,"conditions":213,"keywords":215,"overallStatus":33,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":220,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":221,"startDateStruct":223,"completionDateStruct":225,"leadSponsor":227,"locationsCount":81},"100318026","phase-4-stimulant-effects-on-disruptive-behavior-100318026","NCT03420339","Stimulant Effects on Disruptive Behavior","The Effects of Stimulant Medication on Disruptive Behavior, Choice, and Preference in Children and Adolescents Exhibiting Disruptive Behavior","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Participant must be a child or adolescent between the ages of 4 years, 0 months, and 13 years, 0 months (participants must not be older than 12 years, 11 months).\n2. Participant must have a valid diagnosis of attention deficit\u002Fhyperactivity disorder (AD\u002FHD). No specification of type (e.g., predominately inattentive type, predominately hyperactive-impulsive type, or combined type) will be necessary.\n3. Participant must exhibit disruptive behavior, defined as one or more of the following:\n\n   1. physical or verbal aggression towards others: Hitting, kicking, biting, scratching, choking, spitting at, or throwing items at another person, and\u002For making insults, threats, or swearing at another person.\n   2. self-injury: Hitting self, biting self, banging head on an object\u002Fhard surface, pinching self, or scratching self with visual skin damage.\n   3. destruction: Damaging (or attempts to damage) personal or public property (e.g., breaking an object into two or more pieces, using an object to break other objects, ripping objects or parts of objects from walls, floors, or furniture, and denting cars, objects, or walls.)\n   4. noncompliance:Regular occurrence of verbal refusal (e.g., saying \"no\", \"I don't want to\", \"I won't do it\" or \"not now\") to any academic or non-academic request, and\u002For any response that does not match the delivered instruction within 30 seconds from the time the instruction was delivered.\n   5. tantrum:Crying (i.e., any vocalizations \\[sounds or words\\] accompanied by facial contraction with and without tears for any period of time) and\u002For screaming (occurrence of vocalizations above normal conversational volume for any period of time), with or without body flailing.\n   6. an active diagnosis of disruptive behavior disorder or oppositional defiant disorder.\n4. Participant must already be prescribed a stimulant medication for the treatment of AD\u002FHD symptoms and at an approved dose for age.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. a diagnosis of autism, conduct disorder, or intellectual disability in the moderate, severe or profound range.\n2. prescribed or taking a stimulant dosage outside of recommended therapeutic range.","48 Months","12 Years",{"count":209,"type":19},10,[211],"PHASE4","The goal of this study is to determine the effects of stimulant medication on disruptive behavior, function, preference and choice; however, it is primarily methodological and will add to current research by establishing an effective evaluation of the impact of stimulant medication on these behaviors. Three behavior assessments for children and adolescents diagnosed with AD\u002FHD who exhibit disruptive behavior will be conducted:\n\n1. Preference assessments will be conducted to determine whether preference for social and nonsocial items and activities differs under medication and non-medication conditions.\n2. Functional analyses will be conducted to determine whether stimulant medication has an effect on the frequency and function or purpose of disruptive behavior.\n3. Choice assessments will be conducted to evaluate the impact of stimulant medication on impulse control\u002Fdelay discounting.\n\nThis study will be conducted in three phases. For each of the 5 to 10 participants there will be 8 total visits. The first 4 visits will entail a preference assessment, followed by a functional analysis. On visits 1 and 3, the participant will be asked to take his\u002Fher stimulant medication as is typically done; however, on visits 2 and 4, the participant will be asked to refrain from taking the medication.\n\nFor visits 5-8, participants will continue to participate in preference assessments, but will also be presented with a choice arrangement with work and play. In the choice arrangement, participants will be given four work cards and four play cards that they can organize in any order. Work cards will be associated with a brief academic task and play cards will be associated with a brief play period using high-preferred toys\u002Factivities. On visits 5 and 7 the participant will be asked to take his or her stimulant medication as usual, while on visits 6 and 8 the participant will be asked to refrain from taking his or her medication.",[214,25],"Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder",[216,217,218,219],"stimulant medication","behavioral function","preferences","delay discounting","2025-03-12",{"date":222,"type":37},"2025-03-17",{"date":224,"type":37},"2018-10-01",{"date":226,"type":19},"2027-08-01",{"name":228,"class":44},"Matthew J O'Brien, PhD, BCBA-D"]