Single Subject

Front 1

the design involves a sample of one with repeated measures and design phases

Back 1

single-subject experimental design

Front 2

involves two phases: a pretreatment phase or baseline phase followed by an intervention phase

Back 2

A-B design

Front 3

involves three phases: baseline phase, treatment phase, followed by second baseline phase

Back 3

A-B-A design (multiple baseline design)

Front 4

includes baseline, treatment and additional baseline and treatment phases

Back 4

A-B-A-B (multiple baseline, multiple treatment)

Front 5

includes baseline, treatment and additional baseline, introduction of another treatment and another baseline

Back 5

A-B-A-C-A

Front 6

multiple baseline, multiple treatment of more than a single variation and an application of both treatments at the same time

Back 6

A-B-A-C-A-BC-A

Front 7

includes baseline, treatment and additional baseline, introduction of another treatment, another baseline, application of both treatments combined, another baseline

Back 7

A-B-A-C-A-BC-A

Front 8

(3) limitation of single-system design

Back 8

1. may create ethical dilemmas
2. subject to internal validity threats
3. generalizability may be low
4. theory and practice of statistical analysis of single-system designs is in its infancy

Front 9

this attempts to determine whether a relationship exists between two or more quantifiable variable and to what degree

Back 9

correlational research

Front 10

describes relationships, predicts relationship among variables without active manipulation of the variables

Back 10

correlational research

Front 11

limitations of correlational reseach

Back 11

1. cannot establish cause and effect relationship
2. may fail to consider all variables that enter into a relationship
3. degree of relationship is expressed as correlational coefficient
4. near +1.00 the variable is positively correlated
5. if the correlation is near 0.00 the variables are not related
6. if the correlation is near -1.00 the variables are inversely related

Front 12

they follow basic experimental steps but fail to include a control group. in other words, a single group is often studied but no comparison between an equivalent non-treatment group is made

Back 12

pre-experimental design

Front 13

in this arrangement, subjects are presented with some type of treatment and then the outcome measure is applied. without a comparison group, it is impossible to determine if the outcome scores are any higher than they would have been without the treatment. and without, any pre-test scores, it is impossible to determine if any change within the group itself has taken place

Back 13

the one-shot case study

Front 14

X O2

Back 14

the one-shot case study

Front 15

the benefit of this design is the inclusion of a pretest to determine baseline scores. we can not at least state whether a change in the outcome or dependent variable has taken place. what we cannot say is if this change would have occurred even without the application of the treatment or independent variable

Back 15

one group pretest posttest study

Front 16

O1 X O2

Back 16

one group pretest posttest study

Front 17

this design attempts to make up for the lack of control group but falls short in relation to showing if a change has occurred.

Back 17

the static group comparison study

Front 18

X O2
O2

Back 18

the static group comparison study

Front 19

this attempts to define a cause and effect relationship through group comparisons

Back 19

experimental design

Front 20

other name for experimental design

Back 20

1. true experimental designs
2. randomly controlled trials

Front 21

requisites of a experimental design

Back 21

1. a controlled group
2. an experimental group
3. a pre-test
4. a post-test
5. an independent variable
6. a dependent variable

Front 22

considered to be the gold standard research design for demonstrating a cause-and-effect relationship between an intervention and an outcome

Back 22

RCT

Front 23

type of scientific experiment most commonly used in testing the efficacy or effectiveness of healthcare services (such as medicine or nursing) or health technologies (such as pharmaceuticals, medical devices or surgery)

Back 23

RCT

Front 24

randomization and the comparison of both a control and an experimental group are utilized in this type of study. each group, chosen and assigned at random is presented with either the treatment or some type of control. posttests are then given to each subject to determine if a difference between the two groups exists.

Back 24

posttest only control group

Front 25

R X O2
R O2

Back 25

postest only control group

Front 26

this method is the most effective in terms of demonstrating cause and effect but it is also the most difficult to perform.

Back 26

pre-test-postest equivalent groups study

Front 27

R O1 X O2
R O1 X O2

Back 27

pre-test posttest equivalent groups study

Front 28

new strains that are formed by combining features of more established designs. there are lots of variation that could be constructed from standard design features

Back 28

hybrid design

Front 29

this research design is to deal with potential testing threat

Back 29

the solomon four-group test

Front 30

this design is one of the strongest of the experimental designs. and, when the circumstances are right for this design, it addresses one of the major problems in experimental designs -- the need to deny the program to some participants through random assignment

Back 30

switching replications design

Front 31

experiments in which the researcher does not have full control over the situation

Back 31

quasi-experimental design

Front 32

one that looks a bit like an experimental design but lacks the key ingredient - random assignment

Back 32

quasi-experimental design

Front 33

consists of administering an outcome measure to two groups or to a program/treatment group and a comparison

Back 33

nonequivalent group, posttest olnly

Front 34

X O2
______
O2

Back 34

nonequivalent group posttest only

Front 35

most common quasi-experimental design

Back 35

comparison group pre-test/posttest design

Front 36

this design is the same as the classic controlled experimental design expect that the subjects cannot be randomly assigned to either the experimental or the control group, or the researcher connot control which group will get the treatment

Back 36

comparison group pre-test/post-test design

Front 37

O1 x O2
------------------
O1 O2

Back 37

comparison group pre-test/post-test design

Front 38

this design uses several waves of observation before and after the introduction of the independent (treatment) variable

Back 38

interrupted time series design

Front 39

this type of design works best if the treatment (independent variable) is expected to have an immediate, marked effect, and if the treatment is introduced (implemented) all at once in all relevant situations

Back 39

interrupted time series design

Front 40

O1 O2 O3 O4 x O5 O6 O7 O8

Back 40

interrupted time series design

Front 41

the addition of a second time series for a comparison group helps to provide a check on some of the threats to validity of the single interrupted time series design discussed above, especially history

Back 41

interrupted time series design with comparison group

Front 42

this design uses several waves of obeservation in both groups (treatment and comparison groups) before and after the introduction of the independent variable X in the treatment group.

Back 42

interrupted time series design with comparison group

Front 43

A: O1 O2 O3 O4 x O5 O6 O7 O8
---------------------------------------------
B: O1 O2 O3 O4 x O5 O6
O7 O8

Back 43

interrupted time series design with comparison group

Front 44

combines the results of several studies that address a set of related research hypotheses.

Back 44

meta-analysis

Front 45

literature review focused on a single question which tries to identify, appraise, select and synthesize all high quality research evidence relevant to the question.

Back 45

systematic review

Front 46

generally regarded as the highest level of medical evidence by evidence-based medicine professionals

Back 46

systematic review

Front 47

a systematic review is a summary of research that uses explicit methods to perform a thorough literature search and critical appraisal of individual studies to identify the valid and applicable evidence

Back 47

cochrane database

Front 48

3 types of blinding

Back 48

1. single-blind trial
2. double-blind trial
3. triple-blind trial

Front 49

the researcher knows the details of the treatment but the patient does not. because the patient does not know which treatment is being administered (the new treatment or another treatment) there might be no placebo effect

Back 49

single-blind trial

Front 50

one researcher allocates a series of numbers to 'new treatment' or 'old treatment'. the second researcher is told the numbers, but not what they have been allocated to.

Back 50

double blind trial

Front 51

most accurate results in bliding

Back 51

double-blind trial

Front 52

some randomized controlled trials are considered this, although the meaning of this may vary according the the exact design.

Back 52

triple-blind trial

Front 53

to most common meaning is the subject, researcher and person administering the treatment (often a pharmacist) are blinded to what is being given

Back 53

triple-blind trial