Suppr超能文献

单病例实验设计:已发表研究和现行标准的系统评价。

Single-case experimental designs: a systematic review of published research and current standards.

机构信息

Child and Family Center, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97401-3408, USA.

出版信息

Psychol Methods. 2012 Dec;17(4):510-50. doi: 10.1037/a0029312. Epub 2012 Jul 30.

Abstract

This article systematically reviews the research design and methodological characteristics of single-case experimental design (SCED) research published in peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2010. SCEDs provide researchers with a flexible and viable alternative to group designs with large sample sizes. However, methodological challenges have precluded widespread implementation and acceptance of the SCED as a viable complementary methodology to the predominant group design. This article includes a description of the research design, measurement, and analysis domains distinctive to the SCED; a discussion of the results within the framework of contemporary standards and guidelines in the field; and a presentation of updated benchmarks for key characteristics (e.g., baseline sampling, method of analysis), and overall, it provides researchers and reviewers with a resource for conducting and evaluating SCED research. The results of the systematic review of 409 studies suggest that recently published SCED research is largely in accordance with contemporary criteria for experimental quality. Analytic method emerged as an area of discord. Comparison of the findings of this review with historical estimates of the use of statistical analysis indicates an upward trend, but visual analysis remains the most common analytic method and also garners the most support among those entities providing SCED standards. Although consensus exists along key dimensions of single-case research design, and researchers appear to be practicing within these parameters, there remains a need for further evaluation of assessment and sampling techniques and data analytic methods.

摘要

本文系统地回顾了 2000 年至 2010 年间在同行评议期刊上发表的单案例实验设计(SCED)研究的研究设计和方法学特征。SCED 为研究人员提供了一种灵活且可行的替代方法,可替代具有大样本量的组设计。然而,方法学上的挑战使得 SCED 作为一种可行的组设计补充方法尚未得到广泛实施和接受。本文包括对 SCED 特有的研究设计、测量和分析领域的描述;在该领域当代标准和指南的框架内讨论结果;以及对关键特征(例如,基线抽样、分析方法)的更新基准的介绍,总体上为研究人员和评审人员提供了一个开展和评估 SCED 研究的资源。对 409 项研究的系统回顾结果表明,最近发表的 SCED 研究在很大程度上符合实验质量的当代标准。分析方法是一个存在分歧的领域。将本回顾的结果与历史上对统计分析使用的估计进行比较表明,呈上升趋势,但视觉分析仍然是最常见的分析方法,并且在提供 SCED 标准的实体中也得到了最多的支持。尽管单案例研究设计的关键维度存在共识,研究人员似乎在这些参数范围内进行实践,但仍需要进一步评估评估和抽样技术以及数据分析方法。

相似文献

6
Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.从临床试验参与者中获取不良反应数据。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 16;1(1):MR000039. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000039.pub2.

引用本文的文献

5

本文引用的文献

1
Structural Equation Modeling of Multivariate Time Series.多变量时间序列的结构方程建模。
Multivariate Behav Res. 2007 Jan-Mar;42(1):67-101. doi: 10.1080/00273170701340953.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验