Quality Appraisal of Single-Subject Experimental Designs: An Overview and Comparison of Different Appraisal Tools

Critical appraisal of the research literature is an essential step in informing and implementing evidence-based practice. Quality appraisal tools that assess the methodological quality of experimental studies provide a means to identify the most rigorous research suitable for evidence-based decision-making. In single-subject experimental research, quality appraisal is still in its infancy. Seven different quality appraisal tools were identified and compared with respect to their compliance with current standards for conducting single-subject experiments as well as their performance in evaluating research reports. Considerable variability was noted relative to the construction and content of the tools, which consequently led to variability in their evaluation results. Few tools provided empirical support for the validity of item construction and reliability of use. The Evaluative Method, the Certainty Framework, the What Works Clearinghouse Standards, and the Evidence in Augmentative and Alternative Communication Scales were identified as the more suitable instruments currently available for the critical appraisal of single-subject experimental designs, noting their different strengths and limitations. In the absence of a "gold standard critical appraisal tool," applied researchers and practitioners need to proceed with caution when interpreting evaluation results obtained from the existing tools, keeping their context and intent in mind.

[1]  D. Cicchetti On the Reliability and Accuracy of the Evaluative Method for Identifying Evidence-Based Practices in Autism , 2011 .

[2]  P. Katrak,et al.  A systematic review of the content of critical appraisal tools , 2004, BMC medical research methodology.

[3]  Bryan G. Cook,et al.  A Preliminary Examination to Identify the Presence of Quality Indicators in Single-subject Research , 2008 .

[4]  D. Barlow,et al.  Single Case Experimental Designs: Strategies for Studying Behavior Change , 1976 .

[5]  F. Volkmar,et al.  Development of the Evaluative Method for Evaluating and Determining Evidence-Based Practices in Autism , 2008, Journal of autism and developmental disorders.

[6]  Craig H. Kennedy,et al.  Single-Case Designs for Educational Research , 2004 .

[7]  David L. Gast,et al.  Multiple Baseline and Multiple Probe Designs , 2009 .

[8]  R. Schlosser,et al.  Identifying ‘evidence-based practice’ versus ‘empirically supported treatment’ , 2008 .

[9]  George Stricker,et al.  Criteria for evaluating treatment guidelines. , 2002, The American psychologist.

[10]  Norman H. Anderson,et al.  Empirical Direction in Design and Analysis , 2001 .

[11]  Sharon E Straus,et al.  Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach It , 2010 .

[12]  Matt Tincani,et al.  Using a Modified Social Story to Decrease Disruptive Behavior of a Child With Autism , 2005 .

[13]  M. Wolery,et al.  The Use of Single-Subject Research to Identify Evidence-Based Practice in Special Education , 2005 .

[14]  David L. Gast,et al.  Single subject research methodology in behavioral sciences , 2010 .

[15]  M. E. Boyle Single Case Experimental Designs: Strategies for Studying Behavior Change , 1983 .

[16]  Jennifer Sampson,et al.  Critical Appraisal Guidelines for Single Case Study Research , 2002, ECIS.

[17]  Jennifer B. Ganz,et al.  Self-monitoring: Are Young Adults with MR and Autism able to Utilize Cognitive Strategies Independently? , 2005 .

[18]  D. Sackett Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM , 2018 .

[19]  R. DeRubeis,et al.  Update on Empirically Validated Therapies, II , 1998 .

[20]  Veronica Smith,et al.  Video Modeling to Improve Play Skills in a Child with Autism: A Procedure to Examine Single-Subject Experimental Research , 2009 .

[21]  M. Petticrew,et al.  Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide , 2005 .

[22]  Leanne Togher,et al.  Rating the methodological quality of single-subject designs and n-of-1 trials: Introducing the Single-Case Experimental Design (SCED) Scale , 2008, Neuropsychological rehabilitation.

[23]  Roy I. Brown,et al.  Early Intervention Studies for Young Children with Special Needs , 1991, Rehabilitation Education.

[24]  L. Fetters,et al.  Critically appraised topics. , 2004, Pediatric physical therapy : the official publication of the Section on Pediatrics of the American Physical Therapy Association.

[25]  T. Iacono,et al.  Autism Spectrum Disorders And Aac , 2009 .

[26]  S. Harris,et al.  Case studies, single-subject research, and N of 1 randomized trials: comparisons and contrasts. , 1999, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[27]  Robert H. Horner,et al.  Single-Case Designs Technical Documentation. , 2010 .

[28]  Ian K Crombie,et al.  The pocket guide to critical appraisal. , 1996 .

[29]  Oliver Wendt The effectiveness of augmentative and alternative communication for individuals with autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis , 2006 .

[30]  Ralf W. Schlosser,et al.  A Publicat al Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research ( NCDDR ) The Role of Single-Subject Experimental Designs in Evidence-Based Practice Times , 2009 .

[31]  C. Heriza,et al.  Single‐subject research design: recommendations for levels of evidence and quality rating , 2008, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[32]  Ralf W. Schlosser,et al.  The Efficacy of Augmentative and Alternative Communication: Toward Evidence-Based Practice , 2003 .

[33]  J. E. Carr Recommendations for reporting multiple‐baseline designs across participants , 2005 .

[34]  Michael Perdices,et al.  Single-subject designs as a tool for evidence-based clinical practice: Are they unrecognised and undervalued? , 2009, Neuropsychological rehabilitation.

[35]  M. Tincani,et al.  Comparing the Picture Exchange Communication System and Sign Language Training for Children With Autism , 2004 .

[36]  J. Driban,et al.  Reliability and validity of three quality rating instruments for systematic reviews of observational studies , 2011, Research synthesis methods.

[37]  Selda Ozdemir The Effectiveness of Social Stories on Decreasing Disruptive Behaviors of Children with Autism: Three Case Studies , 2008, Journal of autism and developmental disorders.

[38]  Randall R. Robey,et al.  Evaluating Single-Subject Treatment Research: Lessons Learned from the Aphasia Literature , 2006, Neuropsychology Review.

[39]  D. Bailey,et al.  Evaluating Programme Impact: Levels of Certainty , 1991 .