Campbell Jonathan M
University of Memphis, USA.
Behav Modif. 2004 Mar;28(2):234-46. doi: 10.1177/0145445503259264.
Controversy exists regarding appropriate methods for summarizing treatment outcomes for single-subject designs. Nonregression- and regression-based methods have been proposed to summarize the efficacy of single-subject interventions with proponents of both methods arguing for the superiority of their respective approaches. To compare findings for different single-subject effect sizes, 117 articles that targeted the reduction of problematic behaviors in 181 individuals diagnosed with autism were examined. Four effect sizes were calculated for each article: mean baseline reduction (MBLR), percentage of nonoverlapping data (PND), percentage of zero data (PZD), and one regression-based d statistic. Although each effect size indicated that behavioral treatment was effective, moderating variables were detected by the PZD effect size only. Pearson product-moment correlations indicated that effect sizes differed in statistical relationships to one another. In the present review, the regression-based d effect size did not improve the understanding of single-subject treatment outcomes when compared to nonregression effect sizes.
关于总结单受试者设计治疗结果的适当方法存在争议。已提出基于非回归和回归的方法来总结单受试者干预的疗效，两种方法的支持者都认为各自的方法更具优势。为了比较不同单受试者效应大小的结果，研究了117篇针对减少181名被诊断为自闭症个体的问题行为的文章。每篇文章计算了四种效应大小：平均基线降低（MBLR）、非重叠数据百分比（PND）、零数据百分比（PZD）和一种基于回归的d统计量。尽管每种效应大小都表明行为治疗是有效的，但仅通过PZD效应大小检测到了调节变量。皮尔逊积差相关表明，效应大小在彼此的统计关系上存在差异。在本综述中，与非回归效应大小相比，基于回归的d效应大小并未提高对单受试者治疗结果的理解。
