Abstract
Tools for evaluating the quality and rigor of single case research designs (SCD) are often used when conducting SCD syntheses. Preferred components include evaluations of design features related to the internal validity of SCD to obtain quality and/or rigor ratings. Three tools for evaluating the quality and rigor of SCD (Council for Exceptional Children, What Works Clearinghouse, and Single-Case Analysis and Design Framework) were compared to determine if conclusions regarding the effectiveness of antecedent sensory-based interventions for young children changed based on choice of quality evaluation tool. Evaluation of SCD quality differed across tools, suggesting selection of quality evaluation tools impacts evaluation findings. Suggestions for selecting an appropriate quality and rigor assessment tool are provided and across-tool conclusions are drawn regarding the quality and rigor of studies. Finally, authors provide guidance for using quality evaluations in conjunction with outcome analyses when conducting syntheses of interventions evaluated in the context of SCD.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
