RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Aggressive incidents are common in people with intellectual disabilities. Therefore, we aimed to assess whether supplementation of multivitamins, minerals, and omega-3 fatty acids (FA) reduces aggressive incidents. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, triple blind, placebo controlled, single crossover intervention trial. People with intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning, between 12 and 40 years of age, and showing aggressive behaviour were included. Participants received either a daily dose of dietary supplements, or placebo. Primary outcome was the number of aggressive incidents, measured using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS). RESULTS: there were 113 participants (placebo, n = 56), of whom 24 (placebo, n = 10) participated in the crossover phase of the trial. All 137 trajectories were included in the analyses. There was no significant difference in mean number of aggressive incidents per day between those assigned to supplements and those who received placebo (rate ratio = 0.93: 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.59-1.45). CONCLUSION: In this pragmatic trial, we did not find significant differences in the outcomes between the supplement and placebo arms. The COVID-19 pandemic started midway through our trial, this may have affected the results.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Discapacidad Intelectual , Humanos , Estudios Cruzados , Pandemias , Suplementos Dietéticos , AgresiónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We sought to assess diet quality among people with intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning, living in residential facilities or receiving day care. METHODS: We measured diet quality using the Dutch Healthy Diet Food Frequency Questionnaire (DHD) and compared this between participants with (n = 151) and controls without intellectual disabilities (n = 169). Potential correlates of diet quality were explored. RESULTS: We found lower mean diet quality among people with intellectual disabilities (M = 80.9) compared to controls (M = 111.2; mean adjusted difference -28.4; 95% CI [-32.3, -24.5]; p < .001). Participants with borderline intellectual functioning and mild intellectual disabilities had lower diet quality and higher body mass index than individuals with severe to profound intellectual disabilities. Being female was a predictor of better diet quality. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found that diet quality was low in the sample of people with intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning.
Asunto(s)
Discapacidad Intelectual , Discapacidades para el Aprendizaje , Centros de Día , Dieta Saludable , Femenino , Humanos , Instituciones ResidencialesRESUMEN
We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016. As a result of 2 online surveys and a 2-day meeting of experts, the SCRIBE 2016 checklist was developed, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about single-case research. This article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016 ) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. We recommend that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing single-case research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts. SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012 ). Many such guidelines exist and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008 ) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups intervention studies in the behavioural sciences. The CONSORT Extension for N-of-1 Trials (CENT 2015) was developed for multiple crossover trials with single individuals in the medical sciences (Shamseer et al., 2015 ; Vohra et al., 2015 ), but there is no reporting guideline in the CONSORT tradition for single-case research used in the behavioural sciences. We developed the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 to meet this need. This Statement article describes the methodology of the development of the SCRIBE 2016, along with the outcome of 2 Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting of experts. We present the resulting 26-item SCRIBE 2016 checklist. The article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016 ) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated.
Asunto(s)
Terapia Conductista , Lista de Verificación , Guías como Asunto , Edición , Proyectos de Investigación , Informe de Investigación/normas , Humanos , Revisión de la Investigación por Pares/normasRESUMEN
Occupational therapy is a field with a long-standing history of recommending and implementing interventions designed to improve the quality of life of clients with disabilities. Often, the interventions are individualized to meet the needs of this diverse group of clients in dynamic settings. Identifying effective and efficient interventions for such a diverse group of clients and settings requires a flexible research approach. Single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) allow practitioners and researchers to answer experimental questions within the context of rigorous research designs. The purpose of this article is to highlight the similarities between the mission of occupational therapy and SCEDs. Recommendations for designing single-case studies with the framework provided by the Single-Case Reporting Guideline in Behavioral Interventions are provided. In addition, common problems and proposed solutions, along with implications for practitioners and researchers, are provided.
RESUMEN
Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist, and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups intervention studies in the behavioral sciences. The CONSORT Extension for N-of-1 Trials (CENT 2015) was developed for multiple crossover trials with single individuals in the medical sciences (Shamseer et al., 2015; Vohra et al., 2015), but there is no reporting guideline in the CONSORT tradition for single-case research used in the behavioral sciences. We developed the Single-Case Reporting guideline In Behavioral interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 to meet this need. This Statement article describes the methodology of the development of the SCRIBE 2016, along with the outcome of 2 Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting of experts. We present the resulting 26-item SCRIBE 2016 checklist. The article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated.
Asunto(s)
Ciencias de la Conducta/métodos , Lista de Verificación , Guías como Asunto , Edición/normas , Proyectos de Investigación , Informe de Investigación/normas , Técnica Delphi , HumanosRESUMEN
Visual analysis of graphic displays of data is a cornerstone of studies using a single case experimental design (SCED). Data are graphed for each participant during a study with trend, level, and stability of data assessed within and between conditions. Reliable interpretations of effects of an intervention are dependent on researchers' understanding and use of systematic procedures. The purpose of this paper is to provide readers with a rationale for visual analysis of data when using a SCED, a step-by-step guide for conducting a visual analysis of graphed data, as well as to highlight considerations for persons interested in using visual analysis to evaluate an intervention, especially the importance of collecting reliability data for dependent measures and fidelity of implementation of study procedures.
Asunto(s)
Gráficos por Computador/normas , Neuropsicología/métodos , Neuropsicología/normas , Proyectos de Investigación/normas , Estadística como Asunto/métodos , HumanosRESUMEN
Procedural fidelity (PF) refers to the implementation of a research plan, as intended. Measuring PF should be done not to satisfy minimum requirements for publication but to provide useful information to implementers, researchers, and consumers of research. Measurement of PF requires careful consideration and planning, and should include: naming important steps to be completed in each condition, defining each step, choosing a measurement system, determining which analysis is beneficial, training observers, conducting observations, analysing fidelity and identifying discrepancies, and reporting adequate data for consumers. Careful measurement and reporting of PF data will lead to advances in determining which interventions are effective, for whom, and under what conditions.
Asunto(s)
Investigación Conductal/normas , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Investigación Conductal/métodos , Humanos , Proyectos de Investigación/normas , Estadística como Asunto/normasRESUMEN
In this editorial discussion we reflect on the issues addressed by, and arising from, the papers in this special issue on Single-Case Experimental Design (SCED) study methodology. We identify areas of consensus and disagreement regarding the conduct and analysis of SCED studies. Despite the long history of application of SCEDs in studies of interventions in clinical and educational settings, the field is still developing. There is an emerging consensus on methodological quality criteria for many aspects of SCEDs, but disagreement on what are the most appropriate methods of SCED data analysis. Our aim is to stimulate this ongoing debate and highlight issues requiring further attention from applied researchers and methodologists. In addition we offer tentative criteria to support decision-making in relation to the selection of analytical techniques in SCED studies. Finally, we stress that large-scale interdisciplinary collaborations, such as the current Special Issue, are necessary if SCEDs are going to play a significant role in the development of the evidence base for clinical practice.
Asunto(s)
Proyectos de Investigación/estadística & datos numéricos , Estadística como Asunto/métodos , Humanos , Programas Informáticos , Estadística como Asunto/normasRESUMEN
This paper introduces the Special Issue of Neuropsychological Rehabilitation on Single Case Experimental Design (SCED) methodology. SCED studies have a long history of use in evaluating behavioural and psychological interventions, but in recent years there has been a resurgence of interest in SCED methodology, driven in part by the development of standards for conducting and reporting SCED studies. Although there is consensus on some aspects of SCED methodology, the question of how SCED data should be analysed remains unresolved. This Special Issues includes two papers discussing aspects of conducting SCED studies, five papers illustrating use of SCED methodology in clinical practice, and nine papers that present different methods of SCED data analysis. A final Discussion paper summarises points of agreement, highlights areas where further clarity is needed, and ends with a set of resources that will assist researchers conduct and analyse SCED studies.
Asunto(s)
Neuropsicología/métodos , Neuropsicología/normas , Proyectos de Investigación/normas , Estadística como Asunto/métodos , HumanosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Setting up and conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) has many challenges-particularly trials that include vulnerable individuals with behavioural problems or who reside in facilities that focus on care as opposed to research. These populations are underrepresented in RCTs. APPROACH: In our paper, we describe the challenges and practical lessons learned from two RCTs in two care settings involving long-stay psychiatric inpatients and people with intellectual disabilities. We describe five main difficulties and how these were overcome: (1) multisite setting, (2) inclusion of vulnerable participants, (3) nutritional supplements and placebos, (4) assessment of behavioural outcomes, and (5) collecting bio samples. CONCLUSIONS: By sharing these practical experiences, we hope to inform other researchers how to optimally design their trials, while avoiding and minimising the difficulties that we encountered, and to facilitate the implementation of a trial. Both trials were registered in the Clinical Trials Register (RCT A: NCT02498106; RCT B: NCT03212092).
Asunto(s)
Agresión , Discapacidad Intelectual , Agresión/psicología , HumanosRESUMEN
This study evaluated the acquisition of incidental and observational information presented to 6 children with autism in a small group instructional arrangement using a constant time delay (CTD) procedure. A multiple probe design across behaviors, replicated across 6 participants, was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the CTD procedure and to assess each student's ability to read another student's words and identify related pictures. Generalization was assessed in natural conditions using a pre- and post-test paradigm. Results indicate that, despite their documented deficits in social awareness and imitation, students learned observational and incidental information during small group instruction. Educational implications with regard to small group instruction are discussed.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno Autístico/epidemiología , Procesos de Grupo , Discapacidades para el Aprendizaje/epidemiología , Enseñanza , Trastorno Autístico/diagnóstico , Concienciación , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Observación , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador , Lectura , Refuerzo en PsicologíaRESUMEN
The effects of SMART Board technology, an interactive electronic whiteboard, and a 3s constant time delay (CTD) procedure was evaluated for teaching sight word reading to students with moderate intellectual disabilties within a small group arrangment. A multiple probe design across three word sets and replicated with three students was used to evaluate the effectiveness of SMART Board technology on: (a) reading target grocery words; (b) matching grocery item photos to target grocery words; (c) reading other students' target grocery words through observational learning; and (d) matching grocery item photos to observational grocery words. Results support use of this tool to teach multiple students at one time and its effects on observational learning of non-target information.
Asunto(s)
Atención , Instrucción por Computador , Educación de las Personas con Discapacidad Intelectual , Lectura , Adulto , Aptitud , Curriculum , Aprendizaje Discriminativo , Síndrome de Down/psicología , Síndrome de Down/terapia , Femenino , Preferencias Alimentarias/psicología , Generalización Psicológica , Humanos , Masculino , Reconocimiento Visual de Modelos , Tiempo de Reacción , Semántica , Programas InformáticosRESUMEN
The purpose of this study was to evaluate both video modeling and observational learning to teach age-appropriate recreation and leisure skills (i.e., accessing video games) to students with autism spectrum disorder. Effects of video modeling were evaluated via a multiple probe design across participants and criteria for mastery were based on these results. Secondary measures were collected on observational learning across participants and behaviors. Participants included 4 children with autism, ages 8-11, who were served in self-contained special education classrooms. Results indicated a functional relation between video modeling and increased independence in gaming; observational learning occurred for at least some steps across students. Results, implications for practitioners, limitations, and ideas for future research are discussed.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno del Espectro Autista/psicología , Educación Especial/métodos , Aprendizaje , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudiantes , Juegos de Video , Grabación en VideoRESUMEN
We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016. As a result of 2 online surveys and a 2-day meeting of experts, the SCRIBE 2016 checklist was developed, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about single-case research. This article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. We recommend that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing single-case research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts.Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups intervention studies in the behavioral sciences. The CONSORT Extension for N-of-1 Trials (CENT 2015) was developed for multiple crossover trials with single individuals in the medical sciences (Shamseer et al., 2015; Vohra et al., 2015), but there is no reporting guideline in the CONSORT tradition for single-case research used in the behavioral sciences. We developed the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 to meet this need. This Statement article describes the methodology of the development of the SCRIBE 2016, along with the outcome of 2 Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting of experts. We present the resulting 26-item SCRIBE 2016 checklist. The article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated.
Asunto(s)
Terapia Conductista , Lista de Verificación , Edición/normas , Informe de Investigación/normas , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Guías como Asunto , Humanos , Revisión de la Investigación por Pares/normas , Proyectos de InvestigaciónRESUMEN
UNLABELLED: We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016. As a result of 2 online surveys and a 2-day meeting of experts, the SCRIBE 2016 checklist was developed, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about single-case research. This article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. We recommend that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing single-case research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts. SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT: Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting between groups intervention studies in the behavioral sciences. The CONSORT Extension for N-of-1 Trials (CENT 2015) was developed for multiple crossover trials with single individuals in the medical sciences (Shamseer et al., 2015; Vohra et al., 2015), but there is no reporting guideline in the CONSORT tradition for single-case research used in the behavioral sciences. We developed the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 to meet this need. This Statement article describes the methodology of the development of the SCRIBE 2016, along with the outcome of 2 Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting of experts. We present the resulting 26-item SCRIBE 2016 checklist. The article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated.
Asunto(s)
Terapia Conductista , Lista de Verificación/métodos , Guías como Asunto , Edición/normas , Proyectos de Investigación , Informe de Investigación/normas , Humanos , Revisión de la Investigación por ParesRESUMEN
UNLABELLED: We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016. As a result of 2 online surveys and a 2-day meeting of experts, the SCRIBE 2016 checklist was developed, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about single-case research. This article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. We recommend that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing single-case research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts. SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT: Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups intervention studies in the behavioral sciences. The CONSORT Extension for N-of-1 Trials (CENT 2015) was developed for multiple crossover trials with single individuals in the medical sciences (Shamseer et al., 2015; Vohra et al., 2015), but there is no reporting guideline in the CONSORT tradition for single-case research used in the behavioral sciences. We developed the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 to meet this need. This Statement article describes the methodology of the development of the SCRIBE 2016, along with the outcome of 2 Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting of experts. We present the resulting 26-item SCRIBE 2016 checklist. The article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated.
Asunto(s)
Terapia Conductista , Lista de Verificación , Técnica Delphi , Guías como Asunto , Proyectos de Investigación , Informe de Investigación/normas , Humanos , Revisión de la Investigación por Pares/normasRESUMEN
UNLABELLED: We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016. As a result of 2 online surveys and a 2-day meeting of experts, the SCRIBE 2016 checklist was developed, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about single-case research. This article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. We recommend that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing single-case research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts. SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT: Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups intervention studies in the behavioral sciences. The CONSORT Extension for N-of-1 Trials (CENT 2015) was developed for multiple crossover trials with single individuals in the medical sciences (Shamseer et al., 2015; Vohra et al., 2015), but there is no reporting guideline in the CONSORT tradition for single-case research used in the behavioral sciences. We developed the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 to meet this need. This Statement article describes the methodology of the development of the SCRIBE 2016, along with the outcome of 2 Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting of experts. We present the resulting 26-item SCRIBE 2016 checklist. The article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/arc0000026.supp.
Asunto(s)
Investigación Conductal/normas , Guías como Asunto/normas , Proyectos de Investigación/normas , HumanosRESUMEN
We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016. As a result of 2 online surveys and a 2-day meeting of experts, the SCRIBE 2016 checklist was developed, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about single-case research. This article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 Explanation and Elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single-case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated. We recommend that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing single-case research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts.
RESUMEN
Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups intervention studies in the behavioral sciences. The CONSORT Extension for N-of-1 Trials (CENT 2015) was developed for multiple crossover trials with single individuals in the medical sciences (Shamseer et al., 2015; Vohra et al., 2015), but there is no reporting guideline in the CONSORT tradition for single case research used in the behavioral sciences. We developed the Single Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016 to meet this need. This statement article describes the methodology of the development of the SCRIBE 2016, along with the outcome of 2 Delphi surveys and a consensus meeting of experts. We present the resulting 26-item SCRIBE 2016 checklist. The article complements the more detailed SCRIBE 2016 explanation and elaboration article (Tate et al., 2016) that provides a rationale for each of the items and examples of adequate reporting from the literature. Both these resources will assist authors to prepare reports of single case research with clarity, completeness, accuracy, and transparency. They will also provide journal reviewers and editors with a practical checklist against which such reports may be critically evaluated.
RESUMEN
In this study, a personal digital assistant (PDA) with picture, auditory, and video prompts with voice over, was evaluated as a portable self-prompting device for students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Using a multiple probe design across three cooking recipes and replicated with three students with ASD, the system was tested for its effectiveness in increasing independent performance across the multiple step tasks. In addition, data were recorded for the number and types of prompts used by the students across time. Results indicate that the students with ASD were able to adjust the prompt levels used on the PDA and to maintain their ability to use the device to independently complete recipes over time.