Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35342876›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on behavior science2022

Quantitative Techniques and Graphical Representations for Interpreting Results from Alternating Treatment Design.

Rumen Manolov, René Tanious, Patrick Onghena

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on behavior science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Using Visual Scene Displays with Young Children: An Evidence-Based Practice Synthesis.Journal of special education technology : a publication of Utah State University, the Association for Special Education Technology, and the Technology and Media Division of the Council for Exceptional Children · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. The Family of Single-Case Experimental Designs.Harvard data science review · 2022
    Article
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

3 authors.

Rumen ManolovDepartment of Social Psychology and Quantitative Psychology, University of Barcelona, Passeig de la Vall dHebron 171, 08035 Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-9387-1926
René TaniousMethodology of Educational Sciences Research Group, KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Patrick OnghenaMethodology of Educational Sciences Research Group, KU Leuven - University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple quantitative methods for single-case experimental design data have been applied to multiple-baseline, withdrawal, and reversal designs. The advanced data analytic techniques historically applied to single-case design data are primarily applicable to designs that involve clear sequential phases such as repeated measurement during baseline and treatment phases, but these techniques may not be valid for alternating treatment design (ATD) data where two or more treatments are rapidly alternated. Some recently proposed data analytic techniques applicable to ATD are reviewed. For ATDs with random assignment of condition ordering, the Edgington's

Indexed as

Alternating treatments designConsistencyData analysisRandomization testsSingle-case experimental design

Identifiers

PMID35342876
PMCPMC8894511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.