ArticleJAACAP open2026
A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Research on Interventions for Externalizing Behavior Problems in Children and Adolescents.
Article in JAACAP open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The overall effectiveness of interventions for youth externalizing behavior problems was studied using a review and a meta-analysis of published single-case research in children and adolescents. Method: Scientific databases and gray literature were searched for quantitative single-case studies concerned with the treatment of externalizing behavior problems in children and adolescents. Study and case characteristics were extracted, and the studies were rated for quality. Raw graph data from individual cases were aggregated and analyzed by means of multilevel meta-analysis for single-case research. Results: We identified 78 studies including 270 cases (mean age = 8.70 years; 71.48% male individuals). Overall, positive within-person changes during the treatment as opposed to baseline were observed. Reductions in symptoms did not carry through the follow-up phase. However, variations in treatment effects were observed, with larger variations among studies than among cases. Furthermore, studies using observational assessment methods yielded stronger results than studies using questionnaires to assess outcomes. Although the scores for the external validity of the studies were above average, the scores for internal validity were below average. Conclusion: Although part of the internal validity result can be attributed to underreporting certain quality standards in the studies, it is of great importance for the field of single-case research to start implementing existing methodological guidelines and to comprehensively report case-relevant information. This will, in addition, facilitate our understanding of the variability in treatment outcomes for specific children, and will enable us to learn more about the effects of interventions in diverse youth populations. Study registration information: Preregistration Meta-analysis of Single-Case Research on Interventions for Externalizing Behavioral Problems in Children and Adolescents; https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/4bewa.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.