Single-case synthesis tools I: Comparing tools to evaluate SCD quality and rigor.

Area of Science:

• Research methodology
• Evidence-based practice
• Child development

Background:

• Single case designs (SCD) are crucial for evaluating interventions, particularly in early childhood.
• Synthesizing SCD requires rigorous quality and rigor assessments of study designs.
• Existing tools for SCD quality evaluation may yield different conclusions.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare three prominent SCD quality evaluation tools: Council for Exceptional Children, What Works Clearinghouse, and Single-Case Analysis and Design Framework.
• To determine if the choice of tool influences conclusions about the effectiveness of sensory-based interventions for young children.
• To provide guidance on selecting appropriate quality assessment tools for SCD syntheses.

Main Methods:

• A comparative analysis of three distinct SCD quality evaluation tools.
• Application of these tools to studies evaluating antecedent sensory-based interventions in young children.
• Examination of how differing quality ratings affect synthesized conclusions on intervention effectiveness.

Main Results:

• Significant variations in SCD quality evaluations were observed across the three tools.
• The selection of a quality evaluation tool demonstrably impacted the conclusions drawn regarding intervention effectiveness.
• Discrepancies in rigor ratings suggest potential biases or differing emphases among tools.

Conclusions:

• The choice of a quality evaluation tool is a critical factor in SCD syntheses and can alter research findings.
• Guidance is provided for selecting appropriate tools to ensure robust and reliable SCD syntheses.
• Integrating quality evaluations with outcome analyses is recommended for comprehensive intervention assessment in SCD.