2019
DOI: 10.1080/17483107.2018.1550115
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use of single-subject research designs in seating and wheeled mobility research: a scoping review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The research design incorporates two research strategies combining elements of multiple baseline case studies with quasi-experimental methods where each participant acts as their own control, as recommended for research in this population (Damiano, 2014). The single-subject designs allow examining personal changes, as recommended in interventions studies of wheeled mobility (Kenyon et al, 2020). The quasi-experimental without a control group allows analysis of the group, while reducing the confounding factor of individual variability, as severe CP is a complex diagnosis, making it difficult to achieve two homogeneous groups (Bottos et al, 2001;Damiano, 2014).…”
Section: Methods Study Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The research design incorporates two research strategies combining elements of multiple baseline case studies with quasi-experimental methods where each participant acts as their own control, as recommended for research in this population (Damiano, 2014). The single-subject designs allow examining personal changes, as recommended in interventions studies of wheeled mobility (Kenyon et al, 2020). The quasi-experimental without a control group allows analysis of the group, while reducing the confounding factor of individual variability, as severe CP is a complex diagnosis, making it difficult to achieve two homogeneous groups (Bottos et al, 2001;Damiano, 2014).…”
Section: Methods Study Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…WHO guidelines, professional organizations guidelines), and the evidence that exists commonly involves small sample sizes, inconsistent definitions, and different outcome measurements [16,31]. Most research has been exploratory, including single subject designs in high-income settings, which provide weak evidence [31][32][33]. Efforts targeted at LMICs to measure wheelchair provision outcomes longitudinally have used different measurements, and a significant group of people were lost to follow-up, making it impossible to aggregate the data [34][35][36][37].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%