A Systematic Review of Applied Single-case Research Published Between 2016 and 2018: Study Designs, Randomization, Data Aspects, and Data Analysis

Overview

Journal Behav Res Methods

Publisher Springer

Specialty Social Sciences

Date 2020 Oct 26

PMID 33104956

Citations 14

Authors

Rene Tanious

Patrick Onghena

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) have become a popular research methodology in educational science, psychology, and beyond. The growing popularity has been accompanied by the development of specific guidelines for the conduct and analysis of SCEDs. In this paper, we examine recent practices in the conduct and analysis of SCEDs by systematically reviewing applied SCEDs published over a period of three years (2016-2018). Specifically, we were interested in which designs are most frequently used and how common randomization in the study design is, which data aspects applied single-case researchers analyze, and which analytical methods are used. The systematic review of 423 studies suggests that the multiple baseline design continues to be the most widely used design and that the difference in central tendency level is by far most popular in SCED effect evaluation. Visual analysis paired with descriptive statistics is the most frequently used method of data analysis. However, inferential statistical methods and the inclusion of randomization in the study design are not uncommon. We discuss these results in light of the findings of earlier systematic reviews and suggest future directions for the development of SCED methodology.

Citing Articles

How to personalise cognitive-behavioural therapy for chronic primary pain using network analysis: study protocol for a single-case experimental design with multiple baselines.

Hofmann V, Glombiewski J, Kininger F, Scholten S BMJ Open. 2024; 14(12):e089319.

PMID: 39627123 PMC: 11624839. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089319.

The role of single case experimental designs in evidence creation in rehabilitation.

Machalicek W, Gross D, Armijo-Olivo S, Ferriero G, Kiekens C, Martin R Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2024; 60(6):1100-1111.

PMID: 39374052 PMC: 11729724. DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.24.08713-6.

Generalized Linear Mixed Effects Modeling (GLMM) of Functional Analysis Graphical Construction Elements on Visual Analysis.

Dowdy A, Prime K, Peltier C Perspect Behav Sci. 2024; 47(2):499-521.

PMID: 39099739 PMC: 11294292. DOI: 10.1007/s40614-024-00406-4.

Single Case Experimental Design: A New Approach for Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Research?.

Pate J, McCambridge A Front Neuroergon. 2024; 2:678579.

PMID: 38235212 PMC: 10790913. DOI: 10.3389/fnrgo.2021.678579.

Type I error rates and power of two randomization test procedures for the changing criterion design.

Manolov R, Tanious R Behav Res Methods. 2023; 56(4):3637-3657.

PMID: 38082114 PMC: 11133045. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-023-02303-1.

References

Barlow D, Hayes S . Alternating treatments design: one strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. J Appl Behav Anal. 1979; 12(2):199-210. PMC: 1311363. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1979.12-199. View

EDGINGTON E . Statistical inference from N--1 experiments. J Psychol. 1967; 65(2):195-9. View

Gentile J, Roden A, Klein R . An analysis-of-variance model for the intrasubject replication design. J Appl Behav Anal. 1972; 5(2):193-8. PMC: 1310751. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1972.5-193. View

Hedges L, Pustejovsky J, Shadish W . A standardized mean difference effect size for single case designs. Res Synth Methods. 2015; 3(3):224-39. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1052. View

Hedges L, Pustejovsky J, Shadish W . A standardized mean difference effect size for multiple baseline designs across individuals. Res Synth Methods. 2015; 4(4):324-41. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1086. View

Heyvaert M, Onghena P . Analysis of single-case data: randomisation tests for measures of effect size. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2013; 24(3-4):507-27. DOI: 10.1080/09602011.2013.818564. View

Kratochwill T, Levin J . Meta- and statistical analysis of single-case intervention research data: quantitative gifts and a wish list. J Sch Psychol. 2014; 52(2):231-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsp.2014.01.003. View

Lane J, Gast D . Visual analysis in single case experimental design studies: brief review and guidelines. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2013; 24(3-4):445-63. DOI: 10.1080/09602011.2013.815636. View

Levin J, Ferron J, Gafurov B . Comparison of randomization-test procedures for single-case multiple-baseline designs. Dev Neurorehabil. 2016; 21(5):290-311. DOI: 10.1080/17518423.2016.1197708. View

10.

Ma H . An alternative method for quantitative synthesis of single-subject researches: percentage of data points exceeding the median. Behav Modif. 2006; 30(5):598-617. DOI: 10.1177/0145445504272974. View

11.

Manolov R . Linear Trend in Single-Case Visual and Quantitative Analyses. Behav Modif. 2017; 42(5):684-706. DOI: 10.1177/0145445517726301. View

12.

Manolov R, Moeyaert M . Recommendations for Choosing Single-Case Data Analytical Techniques. Behav Ther. 2017; 48(1):97-114. DOI: 10.1016/j.beth.2016.04.008. View

13.

Manolov R, Onghena P . Analyzing data from single-case alternating treatments designs. Psychol Methods. 2017; 23(3):480-504. DOI: 10.1037/met0000133. View

14.

Michael J . Statistical inference for individual organism research: mixed blessing or curse?. J Appl Behav Anal. 1974; 7(4):647-53. PMC: 1311683. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1974.7-647. View

15.

Michiels B, Heyvaert M, Meulders A, Onghena P . Confidence intervals for single-case effect size measures based on randomization test inversion. Behav Res Methods. 2016; 49(1):363-381. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-016-0714-4. View

16.

Moeyaert M, Ferron J, Beretvas S, Van Den Noortgate W . From a single-level analysis to a multilevel analysis of single-case experimental designs. J Sch Psychol. 2014; 52(2):191-211. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsp.2013.11.003. View

17.

Onghena P, EDGINGTON E . Randomization tests for restricted alternating treatments designs. Behav Res Ther. 1994; 32(7):783-6. DOI: 10.1016/0005-7967(94)90036-1. View

18.

Onghena P, Edgington E . Customization of pain treatments: single-case design and analysis. Clin J Pain. 2004; 21(1):56-68. DOI: 10.1097/00002508-200501000-00007. View

19.

Onghena P, Tanious R, De T, Michiels B . Randomization tests for changing criterion designs. Behav Res Ther. 2019; 117:18-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.brat.2019.01.005. View

20.

Parker R, Vannest K, Davis J . Effect size in single-case research: a review of nine nonoverlap techniques. Behav Modif. 2011; 35(4):303-22. DOI: 10.1177/0145445511399147. View