Assessing the Quality of Single-Case Designs in Occupational Therapy: A Scoping Review

Single-case designs (SCDs) offer a powerful research methodology for demonstrating the effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions for diverse clients with individualized needs. However, the current state of the use of SCDs in occupational therapy remains unclear.

To summarize the current state of and challenges associated with the use of SCDs in occupational therapy.

Articles were retrieved from the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, OTDBASE, and CINAHL. Related articles were manually searched to identify relevant studies, with the publication year restricted to 1990 to 2023.

This scoping review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. The search terms used were occupational therapy, single-case design, and synonyms for single-case design. The search was restricted to journals specifically dedicated to occupational therapy.

Eighty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Existing research has focused on the practice areas of children and youth and physical disabilities or rehabilitation. Moreover, AB designs, ABA designs, and visual analysis that do not meet the What Works Clearinghouse standards are frequently used as research methods.

Although SCDs can be highly useful in demonstrating the effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions for diverse clients with individualized needs, considering the quality of SCDs when designing studies is crucial. Plain-Language Summary: This scoping review delved into the current landscape and challenges of single-case designs (SCDs) in occupational therapy. The findings revealed the pervasive adoption of low-quality designs and the predominant use of visual analysis methods in this field. In light of these findings, it is imperative for future research and development efforts to embrace established guidelines, paving the way for enhanced methodological rigor and robust outcomes.