- Entry
- Reader's guide
- Entries A-Z
- Subject index
icon backReturn to Entries
A scientific experiment is a controlled set of observations aimed at testing whether two or more variables are causally related. William Shadish, Thomas Cook, and Donald Campbell describe two broad types of experiments: (a) randomized experiments, in which study units are randomly assigned to observational conditions; and (b) quasi-experiments, in which study units are not randomly assigned to observational conditions because of ethical or practical constraints. Although it is more difficult to draw causal inferences from quasi-experiments than from randomized experiments, careful planning of quasi-experiments can lead to designs that allow for strong causal inferences.
In order to infer a relationship between cause and effect, three requirements must be met: Cause must precede effect; cause must be related to effect; and, aside from the cause, no ...
- Entry
Quantitative Research
- Entry
Quetelet's Index
1. Law MC, MacDermid J. Evidence-based Rehabilitation: A Guide to Practice, 2nd Ed. Thorofare, NJ: Slack; 2008. [Google Scholar]
2. Kravitz RL, Duan N, Braslow J. Evidence-based medicine, heterogeneity of treatment effects, and the trouble with averages. Milbank Q. 2004;82(4):661–687. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Grimmer K, Bialocerkowski A, Kumar S, Milanese S. Implementing evidence in clinical practice: the 'therapies' dilemma. Physiotherapy. 2004;90(4):189–194. [Google Scholar]
4. Bloom M, Fischer J, Orme JG. Evaluating Practice: Guidelines for the Accountable Professional. 6th Edition ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 2009. [Google Scholar]
5. Guyatt GH, Haynes RB, Jaeschke RZ, Cook DJ, Green L, Naylor CD, Wilson MC, Richardson WS. Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: XXV. Evidence-based medicine: principles for applying the Users' Guides to patient care. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 2000;284(10):1290–1296. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Backman CL, Harris SR, Chisholm JA, Monette AD. Single-subject research in rehabilitation: a review of studies using AB, withdrawal, multiple baseline, and alternating treatments designs. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78(10):1145–1153. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Johnston MV, Smith RO. Single subject designs: current methodologies and future directions. OTJR: Occupation, Participation & Health. 2010;30(1):4–10. [Google Scholar]
8. Lillie EO, Patay B, Diamant J, Issell B, Topol EJ, Schork NJ. The n-of-1 clinical trial: the ultimate strategy for individualizing medicine? Personalized Medicine. 2011;8(2):161–173. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Horner RH, Carr EG, Halle J, McGee G, Odom S, Wolery M. The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Except Child. 2005;71(2):165–179. [Google Scholar]
10. McDougall D, Smith G, Black R, Rumrill P. Recent innovations in small-N designs for rehabilitation research: An extension of Cowan, Hennessey, Vierstra, and Rumrill. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation. 2005;23(3):197–205. [Google Scholar]
11. Ottenbacher KJ. Evaluating Clinical Change: Strategies for Occupational and Physical Therapists. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins; 1986. [Google Scholar]
12. Gonnella C. Single-Subject Experimental Paradigm As A Clinical Decision Tool. Phys Ther. 1989;69(7):601–609. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Marklund I, Klassbo M. Effects of lower limb intensive mass practice in poststroke patients: single-subject experimental design with long-term follow-up. Clin Rehabil. 2006;20(7):568–576. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Backman CL, Harris SR. Case studies, single-subject research, and N of 1 randomized trials: comparisons and contrasts. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;78(2):170–176. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Cowan RJ, Hennessey ML, Vierstra CV, Rumrill PD. Small-N designs in rehabilitation research. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation. 2004;20(3):203–211. [Google Scholar]
16. Zhan S, Ottenbacher KJ. Single subject research designs for disability research. Disabil Rehabil. 2001;23(1):1–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Carey LM, Matyas TA. Training of somatosensory discrimination after stroke: facilitation of stimulus generalization. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;84(6):428–442. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Diamond MF, Ottenbacher KJ. Effect of a tone-inhibiting dynamic ankle-foot orthosis on stride characteristics of an adult with hemiparesis. Phys Ther. 1990;70(7):423–430. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Harbst KB, Ottenbacher KJ, Harris SR. Interrater reliability of therapists' judgements of graphed data. Phys Ther. 1991;71(2):107–115. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. Small Clinical Trials: Issues and Challenges. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academy Press; 2001. Committee on Strategies for Small-Number-Participant Clinical Research Trials. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21. Ridenour TA, Hall DL, Bost JE. A small sample randomized clinical trial methodology using N-of-1 designs and mixed model analysis. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse. 2009;35(4):260–266. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22. Van den Noortgate W, Onghena P. Hierarchical linear models for the quantitative integration of effect sizes in single-case research. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers. 2003;35(1):1–10. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23. Edington ES. Randomized single-subject experimental designs. Behav Res Ther. 1996;34(7):567–574. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
24. Glass GV, Willson VL, Gottman JM. Design and Analysis of Time-series Experiments. Boulder: Colorado Associated University Press; 1975. [Google Scholar]
25. Harrop JW, Velicer WF. A Comparison of Alternative Approaches to the Analysis of Interrupted Time-Series. Multivariate Behav Res. 1985;20(1):27–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
26. Hayes SC. Single case experimental design and empirical clinical practice. J Consult Clin Psych. 1981;49(2):193–211. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
27. Kazdin AE. Single-case research designs in clinical child-psychiatry. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1983;22(5):423–432. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
28. Ottenbacher KJ. Analysis of data in idiographic research. Issues and methods. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1992;71(4):202–208. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29. Manolov R, Solanas A. Comparing N = 1 effect size indices in presence of autocorrelation. Behav Modif. 2008;32(6):860–875. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30. Manolov R, Solanas A, Leiva D. Comparing "visual" effect size indices for single-case designs. Methodology: Eur J Res Methods Behav Soc Sci. 2010;6(2):49–58. [Google Scholar]
31. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;312(7023):71–72. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
32. Gabler NB, Duan N, Vohra S, Kravitz RL. N-of-1 Trials in the Medical Literature: A Systematic Review. Med Care. 2011;49(8):761–768. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
33. Koch LC, Schultz JC, Kontosh LG, Conyers LM. Rehabilitation research in the 21st century: concerns and potential solutions. Rehabil Educ. 2006;20(1):7–19. [Google Scholar]
34. Barlow DH, Hersen M. Single Case Experimental Designs: Strategies for Studying Behavior Change. New York: Pergamon Press; 1984. [Google Scholar]
35. Lipsey MW, Wilson DB. Practical Meta-Analysis. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications; 2001. [Google Scholar]