Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32125716›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied behavior analysis2020

The consecutive controlled case series: Design, data-analytics, and reporting methods supporting the study of generality.

Louis P Hagopian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The role of re-presentation in the treatment of liquid expulsion.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Relational Databases for Behavior Science.Perspectives on behavior science · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A scoping review of consecutive controlled case series studies.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. The Need to Distinguish between "Lapse" and "Relapse".Perspectives on behavior science · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Louis P HagopianKennedy Krieger Institute.

Funding

Sleep and Circadian Dysfunction, Brain and Neurobehavioral Development in AutismP50HD103538 · NICHD · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI S. Ali Fatemi, Bradley L Schlaggar · 2020 to 2026
$9.9M
Translational Neuroscience CoreU54HD079123 · NICHD · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI FATEMI, S. ALI, SCHLAGGAR, BRADLEY L · 2014 to 2019
$7.9M
Delineating Subtypes of Self-Injurious Behavior Maintained by Automatic ReinforceR01HD076653 · NICHD · HUGO W. MOSER RES INST KENNEDY KRIEGER · PI HAGOPIAN, LOUIS P. · 2013 to 2024
$3.2M
NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD103538NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD076653NICHD NIH HHS U54 HD079123
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) have proven invaluable in research and practice because they are optimal for asking many experimental questions relevant to the analysis of behavior. The consecutive controlled case series (CCCS) is a type of study in which a SCED is employed in a series of consecutively encountered cases that undergo a common procedure or share a common characteristic. Additional design elements, data-analytic, and reporting methods enable researchers to ask experimental questions relevant to the study of generality of procedures and processes. The current paper discusses the CCCS methodologies, including the retrospective, prospective, and randomized CCCS. These methodologies can be applied to examine the generality of clinical procedures (including their general efficacy, the limits of their generality, and variables that may mediate generality); study the epidemiology and phenomenology of clinical problems; and compare the efficacy of 2 clinical procedures within a randomized controlled trial combining SCEDs with randomized group designs.

Indexed as

Research DesignClinical Trials as TopicHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective Studiesconsecutive controlled case seriesdesigngeneralitymethodologyreliability

Identifiers

PMID32125716
PMCPMC8805508

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.