University of Wisconsin, Madison, United States of America.
University of Oregon, United States of America.
J Sch Psychol. 2023 Apr;97:192-216. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2022.12.002. Epub 2023 Feb 22.
Single-case intervention research design standards have evolved considerably over the past decade. These standards serve the dual role of assisting in single-case design (SCD) intervention research methodology and as guidelines for literature syntheses within a particular research domain. In a recent article (Kratochwill et al., 2021), we argued for a need to clarify key features of these standards. In this article we offer additional recommendations for SCD research and synthesis standards that have been either underdeveloped or missing in the conduct of research and in literature syntheses. Our recommendations are organized into three categories: expanding design standards, expanding evidence standards, and expanding the applications and consistency of SCDs. The recommendations we advance are for consideration for future standards, research design training, and they are especially important to guide the reporting of SCD intervention investigations as they enter the literature-synthesis phase of evidence-based practice initiatives.
单案例干预研究设计标准在过去十年中得到了极大的发展。这些标准具有双重作用,一方面可以帮助进行单案例设计(SCD)干预研究方法,另一方面可以作为特定研究领域文献综述的指南。在最近的一篇文章(Kratochwill 等人,2021)中,我们认为需要澄清这些标准的关键特征。在本文中,我们针对 SCD 研究和综述标准提出了一些额外的建议,这些标准在研究和文献综述中要么不够完善,要么缺失。我们的建议分为三类:扩展设计标准、扩展证据标准以及扩展 SCD 的应用和一致性。我们提出的建议是为了供未来标准、研究设计培训考虑,特别是对于指导 SCD 干预研究报告,因为它们进入了循证实践倡议的文献综述阶段,这些建议非常重要。