University of Arizona.
University of Wisconsin-Madison.
J Exp Anal Behav. 2019 Nov;112(3):334-348. doi: 10.1002/jeab.558. Epub 2019 Nov 10.
Following up on articles recently published in this journal, the present contribution tells (some of) "the rest of the story" about the value of randomization in single-case intervention research investigations. Invoking principles of internal, statistical-conclusion, and external validity, we begin by emphasizing the critical distinction between design randomization and analysis randomization, along with the necessary correspondence between the two. Four different types of single-case design-and-analysis randomization are then discussed. The persistent negative influence of serially dependent single-case outcome observations is highlighted, accompanied by examples of inappropriate applications of parametric and nonparametric tests that have appeared in the literature. We conclude by presenting valid applications of single-case randomization procedures in various single-case intervention contexts, with specific reference to a freely available Excel-based software package that can be accessed to incorporate the present randomization schemes into a wide variety of single-case intervention designs and analyses.
继本刊近期发表的几篇文章之后，本研究进一步阐述了随机分组在单病例干预研究中的价值。本研究援引内部、统计结论和外部有效性原则，首先强调了设计随机分组和分析随机分组之间的关键区别，以及两者之间的必要对应关系。接着讨论了四种不同类型的单病例设计和分析随机分组。研究强调了连续依赖的单病例结果观察的持续负面影响，并提供了文献中出现的参数和非参数检验不当应用的示例。最后，我们介绍了单病例随机分组程序在各种单病例干预背景下的有效应用，并特别提到了一个免费的基于 Excel 的软件包，该软件包可用于将当前的随机分组方案纳入各种单病例干预设计和分析中。
