Archer Brent, Azios Jamie H, Müller Nicole, Macatangay Lauren
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Bowling Green State University, OH.
Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Lamar University, Beaumont, TX.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019 Jul 15;62(7):2473-2482. doi: 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-L-18-0186. Epub 2019 Jul 1.
Purpose In single-case treatment studies, researchers may compare client performance during a baseline, nontreatment phase(s) to client performance during intervention phases. Autocorrelation in the data series gathered during such studies increases the likelihood that analysts will detect or fail to detect meaningful differences between baseline and treatment phase data. We examined the impact that autocorrelation has on 4 effect size calculation methods when these methods are applied to data generated by people with aphasia during anomia treatment studies. The effect sizes we selected were Busk and Serlin's Young's , nonoverlap of all pairs, and Tau-. We hypothesized that and would be influenced by autocorrelation, whereas nonoverlap of all pairs and Tau- would not. Method We extracted 173 highly autocorrelated data series from published investigations of treatments for anomia. These data series were then "cleansed" of autocorrelation through the use of an autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) process. The 4 effect size calculation methods were used to derive an effect size for each published and each corresponding ARIMA-tized data series. The published and ARIMA-tized effect sizes associated with each calculation method were then compared. Results For all of the 4 effect sizes, statistically significant differences existed between the published effect sizes and the ARIMA-tized effect sizes. Conclusions All 4 of the methods were influenced by autocorrelation. Further research that develops effect size calculation methods that are not influenced by autocorrelation will help to improve the quality of single-case studies. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.8298530.
目的 在单病例治疗研究中,研究人员可能会将基线期、非治疗阶段的患者表现与干预阶段的患者表现进行比较。在此类研究中收集的数据系列中的自相关性增加了分析人员检测到或未检测到基线期和治疗阶段数据之间有意义差异的可能性。我们研究了自相关性对4种效应量计算方法的影响,这些方法应用于失语症患者在命名障碍治疗研究中产生的数据。我们选择的效应量是巴斯克和塞尔林的、杨氏的、所有配对的非重叠以及Tau-。我们假设和会受到自相关性的影响,而所有配对的非重叠和Tau-则不会。方法 我们从已发表的命名障碍治疗研究中提取了173个高度自相关的数据系列。然后通过使用自回归积分移动平均(ARIMA)过程对这些数据系列进行自相关性“清理”。使用4种效应量计算方法为每个已发表的和每个相应的经过ARIMA处理的数据系列得出一个效应量。然后比较与每种计算方法相关的已发表效应量和经过ARIMA处理的效应量。结果 对于所有4种效应量,已发表效应量和经过ARIMA处理的效应量之间存在统计学上的显著差异。结论 所有4种方法都受到自相关性的影响。进一步开展开发不受自相关性影响的效应量计算方法的研究将有助于提高单病例研究的质量。补充材料 https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.8298530 。