Departments of Communication Sciences and Disorders, and Applied Psychology, Northeastern University, United States; Department of Otolaryngology and Communication Enhancement, Boston Children's Hospital, United States; Centre for Augmentative and Alternative Communication, University of Pretoria, South Africa.
Program of Special Education and Applied Disability Studies, Mercyhurst University, United States.
Res Dev Disabil. 2018 Aug;79:33-52. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2018.04.028. Epub 2018 May 28.
Evidence-based practice as a process requires the appraisal of research as a critical step. In the field of developmental disabilities, single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) figure prominently as a means for evaluating the effectiveness of non-reversible instructional interventions. Comparative SCEDs contrast two or more instructional interventions to document their relative effectiveness and efficiency. As such, these designs have great potential to inform evidence-based decision-making. To harness this potential, however, interventionists and authors of systematic reviews need tools to appraise the evidence generated by these designs. Our literature review revealed that existing tools do not adequately address the specific methodological considerations of comparative SCEDs that aim to compare instructional interventions of non-reversible target behaviors. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the Comparative Single-Case Experimental Design Rating System (CSCEDARS, "cedars") as a tool for appraising the internal validity of comparative SCEDs of two or more non-reversible instructional interventions. Pertinent literature will be reviewed to establish the need for this tool and to underpin the rationales for individual rating items. Initial reliability information will be provided as well. Finally, directions for instrument validation will be proposed.
循证实践作为一个过程，需要将研究评价作为一个关键步骤。在发展性残疾领域，个案实验设计（SCED）作为评估非可逆性教学干预效果的一种手段，显得尤为重要。比较性 SCED 将两种或多种教学干预进行对比，以记录它们的相对效果和效率。因此，这些设计具有为循证决策提供信息的巨大潜力。然而，为了利用这种潜力，干预者和系统评价的作者需要工具来评估这些设计产生的证据。我们的文献回顾表明，现有的工具不能充分解决旨在比较非可逆目标行为的教学干预的比较性 SCED 的具体方法考虑。本文的目的是介绍比较性单案例实验设计评分系统（CSCEDARS，“cedars”），作为评估两个或多个非可逆教学干预比较性 SCED 的内部有效性的工具。将审查相关文献，以确定对这一工具的需求，并为各个评分项目提供依据。还将提供初始可靠性信息。最后，将提出仪器验证的方向。
