Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs01:15

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs

376
Bioequivalence experimental study designs play a pivotal role in testing the effectiveness of various treatments. Key among these are the repeated measures, cross-over, carry-over, and Latin square designs. In the repeated measures design, each subject receives all treatments, allowing for temporal comparisons. This type of design is useful in reducing variability but requires careful planning to avoid bias.The cross-over design, an economical method, involves sequential administration of...
376
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs01:20

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs

358
Bioequivalence experimental study designs are crucial methodologies used in evaluating and comparing the bioavailability of different drug products. These designs are categorized into various types: completely randomized, randomized block, repeated measures, cross and carry-over, and Latin square designs.Completely randomized designs involve randomly allocating treatments to all subjects participating in the experiment. This allocation is achieved by assigning unique random numbers to subjects...
358
Randomized Experiments01:13

Randomized Experiments

9.3K
The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...
9.3K
Experimental Designs01:16

Experimental Designs

18.5K
An experimental design is a systematic process that allows researchers to evaluate the relationship between dependent and independent variables. There are three widely used types of experimental design - pre-experimental design, true experimental design, and quasi-experimental design. In pre-experimental design, the researcher compares the data before and after some interventions or treatments. The true-experimental design has more than one purposefully created group, a commonly measured...
18.5K
Crossover Experiments01:16

Crossover Experiments

4.7K
Crossover experiments, also called the repeated-measurements design, is a study design in which all experimental units are exposed to all treatments in different periods. Crossover experiments are generally used in psychology, the pharmaceutical industry, agriculture, and medicine.
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
4.7K
What is an Experiment?01:12

What is an Experiment?

19.7K
An experiment is a planned activity carried out under controlled conditions. The purpose of an experiment is to investigate the relationship between two variables. When one variable causes change in another, we call the first variable the explanatory or independent variable. The affected variable is called the response or dependent variable. In a randomized experiment, the researcher manipulates values of the explanatory variable and measures the resulting changes in the response variable. The...
19.7K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Power analysis for single-case designs: Computations for (AB)<sup>k</sup> designs.

Behavior research methods·2022
Same author

Pre-hospital qSOFA as a predictor of sepsis and mortality.

The American journal of emergency medicine·2018
Same author

Using Bayesian Correspondence Criteria to Compare Results From a Randomized Experiment and a Quasi-Experiment Allowing Self-Selection.

Evaluation review·2018
Same author

Predictors of Depression Among Adult Women With Diabetes in the United States: An Analysis Using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Data From 2007 to 2012.

The Diabetes educator·2016
Same author

A survey of publication practices of single-case design researchers when treatments have small or large effects.

Journal of applied behavior analysis·2016
Same author

Abstract: Modeling Single-Case Designs With Generalized Additive Models.

Multivariate behavioral research·2016

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 22, 2026

A Within-Subject Experimental Design using an Object Location Task in Rats
09:28

A Within-Subject Experimental Design using an Object Location Task in Rats

Published on: May 6, 2021

5.4K

Single-case experimental design yielded an effect estimate corresponding to a randomized controlled trial.

William R Shadish1, David M Rindskopf2, Jonathan G Boyajian3

  • 1Department of Psychological Sciences, University of California Merced, 5200 N Lake Rd., Merced, CA 95343, USA.

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
|April 16, 2016
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Single-case experimental designs closely mirrored randomized controlled trial (RCT) outcomes in hypogammaglobulinaemia patients receiving intravenous immunoglobulin (IgG). Further research is needed to confirm these findings across various conditions.

Keywords:
Comparative effectivenessEvaluationRandomized controlled trialResearch methodsSingle-case experimental designsWithin-study comparison

More Related Videos

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation tDCS for Memory Enhancement
10:37

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation tDCS for Memory Enhancement

Published on: September 18, 2021

16.2K
Characterization of Complex Systems Using the Design of Experiments Approach: Transient Protein Expression in Tobacco as a Case Study
20:24

Characterization of Complex Systems Using the Design of Experiments Approach: Transient Protein Expression in Tobacco as a Case Study

Published on: January 31, 2014

17.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 22, 2026

A Within-Subject Experimental Design using an Object Location Task in Rats
09:28

A Within-Subject Experimental Design using an Object Location Task in Rats

Published on: May 6, 2021

5.4K
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation tDCS for Memory Enhancement
10:37

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation tDCS for Memory Enhancement

Published on: September 18, 2021

16.2K
Characterization of Complex Systems Using the Design of Experiments Approach: Transient Protein Expression in Tobacco as a Case Study
20:24

Characterization of Complex Systems Using the Design of Experiments Approach: Transient Protein Expression in Tobacco as a Case Study

Published on: January 31, 2014

17.2K

Area of Science:

  • Immunology
  • Clinical Trials
  • Biostatistics

Background:

  • Hypogammaglobulinaemia necessitates immunoglobulin (IgG) replacement therapy.
  • Intravenous immunoglobulin (IgG) is a common treatment for primary immunodeficiencies.
  • Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are standard for evaluating treatment efficacy.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the analytical outcomes of single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) with traditional randomized controlled trial (RCT) analysis.
  • To assess the utility of SCEDs in reanalyzing existing crossover trial data for hypogammaglobulinaemia patients.

Main Methods:

  • Reanalysis of a 12-time point randomized crossover trial involving high vs. low intravenous immunoglobulin (IgG) doses.
  • Independent analysis by two statisticians: one using RCT methods, the other using Bayesian nonlinear framework for six SCEDs.
  • Comparison of serum IgG levels between treatment groups at the trial endpoint and across all time points.

Main Results:

  • The RCT analysis showed significantly higher serum IgG levels in the high-dose IgG group (MD = 511.05, SE = 46.98).
  • The SCED analysis yielded comparable results, with a significant effect size (MD = 495.00, SE = 54.41).
  • Exploratory analyses highlighted the impact of trend modeling on SCED conclusions.

Conclusions:

  • Single-case experimental designs can approximate the results obtained from traditional randomized controlled trials.
  • The findings suggest SCEDs may offer a viable alternative or complementary analytical approach.
  • Further investigation is required to establish the conditions and limitations for using SCEDs in similar clinical contexts.