Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42729723›Full record

ReviewPerspectives on behavior science2026

Establishing Core Outcome Sets to Advance Evidence Synthesis in Behavior Analysis.

Alan Tennyson, Richard May, Aoife Mc Tiernan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Perspectives on behavior science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Alan TennysonSchool of Psychology, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0009-0004-0788-6673
Richard MaySchool of Psychology, University of South Wales, Pontypridd, UK.
Aoife Mc TiernanSchool of Psychology, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Applied behavior analysis is grounded in data-based decision-making and evidence-based practice (EBP). EBP is increasingly reliant on evidence syntheses (i.e., the combining of findings from multiple research studies to inform on a particular topic). Within this context, outcome heterogeneity is defined as variability in the outcome measures employed across research studies evaluating a particular intervention, including what is measured, how, and when. Outcome heterogeneity has been identified as a substantive barrier to evidence synthesis across health and social care, with direct consequences for clinical guideline development and policy. This article draws on examples from behavior-analytic and adjacent research to argue that outcome heterogeneity represents a methodological challenge for behavior analysis. A Core Outcome Set (COS) is a consensus-based, standardized set of outcomes that should be measured and reported as a minimum when evaluating a particular intervention. COS have been developed across a range of health behavior change interventions (e.g., for sedentary behavior, behavioral weight management, self-management of diabetes) as a structured response to the challenge of outcome heterogeneity. This article proposes increased engagement with the broader movement toward COS and argues that behavior analysis offers methodological resources not currently included in COS frameworks. Engagement with COS infrastructure should be approached with critical consideration, incorporating reflection on both its potential risks and benefits, as well as its alignment with the principles and practices of the field of behavior analysis. Risks of engagement, including the potential marginalization of idiographic measurement and inductive experiment techniques, are identified and mitigations proposed.

Indexed as

Behavior analysisCore outcome setsEvidence synthesisOutcome heterogeneitySingle-case experimental designSocial validity

Identifiers

PMID42729723
PMCPMC13562490

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.