Comparison of visual inspection and statistical analysis of single-subject data in rehabilitation research

被引:31
作者
Bobrovitz, CD [1 ]
Ottenbacher, KJ [1 ]
机构
[1] SUNY Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260 USA
关键词
data analysis; visual inspection; statistical tests;
D O I
10.1097/00002060-199803000-00002
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Single-subject designs are being advocated to conduct outcome research in rehabilitation environments. The methods provide an alternative to traditional designs based on statistical comparisons across groups. Data analysis in single subject research does not rely on statistical hypothesis testing of responses collected from a sample of subjects. Instead, visual inspection of patient responses graphed over time is the usual method of data analysis in single-subject research. This study examined the agreement between visual analysis and statistical tests of single-subject data for 42 hypothetical single-subject graphs. Specially constructed graphs allowed the systematic manipulation of different treatment effect sizes across a commonly used single-subject design. Thirty-two rehabilitation and health care providers rated each of the 42 graphs to determine whether a clinically significant treatment effect existed across the phases of the designs. Data analysis focused on two questions: (1) How much agreement was there between visual judgments and the results of statistical tests? and (2) What level of treatment effect was required to produce a finding of visual versus statistical significance? The agreement between visual analysis and statistical significance was high (86%). The sensitivity of visual inferences compared with statistical test results was 0.84, specificity was 0.88, and positive predictive value was 0.91. Both visual and statistical procedures were sensitive to medium and large treatment effects in the 42 single-subject graphs examined in this study.
引用
收藏
页码:94 / 102
页数:9
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]   Single-subject research in rehabilitation: A review of studies using AB, withdrawal, multiple baseline, and alternating treatments designs [J].
Backman, CL ;
Harris, SR ;
Chisholm, JAM ;
Monette, AD .
ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 1997, 78 (10) :1145-1153
[2]  
Barlow D.H., 1984, The Scientist-Practitioner: Research andAccountability in ClinicalandEducationalSettings
[3]  
BARLOW DH, 1984, SINGLE CASE EXPT DES
[4]  
Bloom M., 1982, EVALUATING PRACTICE
[5]   INCONSISTENT VISUAL ANALYSES OF INTRASUBJECT DATA [J].
DEPROSPERO, A ;
COHEN, S .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS, 1979, 12 (04) :573-579
[6]  
Edmans J A, 1989, Int Disabil Stud, V11, P25
[7]   SINGLE-SUBJECT EXPERIMENTAL PARADIGM AS A CLINICAL DECISION TOOL [J].
GONNELLA, C .
PHYSICAL THERAPY, 1989, 69 (07) :601-609
[8]   DETERMINING OPTIMAL THERAPY - RANDOMIZED TRIALS IN INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS [J].
GUYATT, G ;
SACKETT, D ;
TAYLOR, DW ;
CHONG, J ;
ROBERTS, R ;
PUGSLEY, S .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1986, 314 (14) :889-892
[9]   N OF 1 RANDOMIZED TRIALS FOR INVESTIGATING NEW DRUGS [J].
GUYATT, GH ;
HEYTING, A ;
JAESCHKE, R ;
KELLER, J ;
ADACHI, JD ;
ROBERTS, RS .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1990, 11 (02) :88-100
[10]   INTERRATER RELIABILITY OF THERAPISTS JUDGMENTS OF GRAPHED DATA [J].
HARBST, KB ;
OTTENBACHER, KJ ;
HARRIS, SR .
PHYSICAL THERAPY, 1991, 71 (02) :107-115