Evaluating single-subject treatment research: Lessons learned from the aphasia literature

Neuropsychology Review

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 161-169

  Beeson, Pélagie M ^a,b   Robey, Randall R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Effect size; Evidence based practice; Meta analysis; Outcomes; Rehabilitation; Stroke; Treatment

Indexed keywords

APHASIA; ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

APHASIA; CLINICAL TRIALS; HUMANS; PATIENT SELECTION; RESEARCH DESIGN; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33845907907     PISSN: 10407308     EISSN: 15736660     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11065-006-9013-7     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Backman, C. L., Harris, S. R., Chisholm, J. M., & Monette, A. D. (1997). Single-subject research in rehabilitation: A review of studies using AB, withdrawal, multiple baseline, and alternate treatments designs. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78, 1145-1153.
2. Beeson, P. M., & Egnor, H. (2006). Combining treatment for written and spoken naming. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 12, 816-827.
3. Beeson, P. M., Magloire, J., & Robey, R. R. (2005). Letter-by-letter reading: Natural recovery and response to treatment. Behavioural Neurology, 16, 191-202.
4. Bezeau, S., & Graves, R. (2001). Statistical power and effect sizes of neuropsychology research. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 23, 399-406.
5. Busk, P. L., & Serlin, R. (1992). Meta-analysis for single case research. In T. R. Kratochwill & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Single-case research design and analysis: New directions for psychology and education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Center, B. A., Skiba, R. J., & Casey, A. (1985-1986). A methodology for the quantitative synthesis of intra-subject design research. Journal of Special Education, 19, 387-400.
7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, Second edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8. Faith, M. S., Allison, D. B., & Gorman, B. S. (1997). Meta-analysis of single-case research. In D. R. Franklin, D. B. Allison, & B. S. Gorman (Eds.), Design and analysis of single-case research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Fan, X. (2001). Statistical significance and effect size in educational research: two sides of a coin. Journal of Educational Research, 94, 275-282.
10. Fink, R. B., Brecher, A., Schwartz, M. F., & Robey, R. R. (2002). A computer-implement protocol for treatment of naming disorders: Evaluation of clinician-guided and partially self-guided instruction. Aphasiology, 16, 1061-1086.
11. Garrett, Z., & Thomas, J. (2006). International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 43, 95-105.
12. Greener, J., Enderby, P., & Whurr, R. (1999). Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke (Review). The Cochrane Library, 2, 1-62.
13. Harbour, R., & Miller, J. (2001). A new system for grading recommendations in evidence based guidelines. British Medical Journal, 323, 334-336.
14. Hyde, J. S. (2001). Reporting effect sizes: The roles of editors, textbook authors, and publication manuals. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 225-228.
15. Johnston, M. V., Ottenbacher, K. J., & Reichardt, C. S. (1995). Strong quasi-experimental designs for research on the effectiveness of rehabilitation. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 74, 383-392.
16. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746-759.
17. Kirk, R. E. (2001). Promoting good statistical practices: Some suggestions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 213-218.
18. Kromrey, J. D., & Foster-Johnson, L. (1996). Determining the efficacy of intervention: The use of effect sizes for data analysis in single-subject research. The Journal of Experimental Education, 65, 73-93.
19. Matyas, T. A., & Greenwood, K. M. (1990). Visual analysis of single-case time series: Effects of variability, serial dependence, and magnitude of intervention effects. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 341-351.
20. McReynolds, L. V., & Thompson, C. K. (1986). Flexibility of single-subject experimental designs. Part I: Review of the basics of single-subject designs. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 51, 194-203.
21. Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Okin, I., Rennie, D., Stroup, D. F., the QUOROM Group. (1999). Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. The Lancet, 354, 1896-1900.
22. Nix, T. W., & Barnette, J. J. (1998). A review of hypothesis testing revisited: Rejoinder to Thompson, Knapp, and Levin. Research in Schools, 5, 55-57.
23. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). (2001). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
24. Pring, T. (2004). Ask a silly question: two decades of troublesome trials. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 39, 285-302.
25. Robey, R. R. (1994). The efficacy of treatment for aphasic persons: A meta-analysis. Brain and Language, 47, 582-608.
26. Robey, R. R. (1998). A meta-analysis of clinical outcomes in the treatment of aphasia. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 41, 172-187.
27. Robey, R. R., & Beeson, P. M. (2005). Aphasia treatment: Examining the evidence. Presentation at the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Annual Convention. San Diego, CA.
28. Robey, R. R., & Schultz, M. C. (1998). A model for conducting clinical outcome research: An adaptation of the standard protocol for use in aphasiology. Aphasiology, 12, 787-810.
29. Robey, R. R., Schultz, M. C., Crawford, A. B., & Sinner, C. A. (1999). Single-subject clinical-outcome research: designs, data, effect sizes, and analyses. Aphasiology, 13, 445-473.
30. Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A. (1998). Summarizing single-subject research. Behaviour Modification, 22, 221-242.
31. Shaver, J. P. (1993). What statistical testing is, and what it is not? Journal of Experimental Education, 61, 293-316.
32. Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
33. Thompson, B. (1998). Statistical significance and effect size reporting: Portrait of a possible future. Research in Schools, 5, 33-38.
34. Thompson, B. (2002). What future quantitative social science research could look like: Confidence intervals for effect sizes. Educational Researcher (3), 31, 25-32.
35. Vacha-Haase, T. (2001). Statistical significance should not be considered one of life's guarantees: Effect sizes are needed. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 219-224.
36. White, D. M., Rusch, F. R., & Kazdin, A. E. (1989). Applications of meta-analysis in individual-subject research. Behavioral Assessment, 11(3), 281-296.
37. Whurr, R., Lorch, M., & Nye, C. (1992). A meta-analysis of studies carried out between 1946 and 1988 concerned with the efficacy of speech and language therapy treatment for aphasic patients. European Journal of Disorders of Communication, 27, 1-17.
38. World Health Organization (1975). WHO Scientific Group on Guidelines for Evaluation of Drugs for Use in Man (Geneva: World Health Organization).
39. Wortman, P. M. (1994). Judging research quality. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.