Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Single-Subject Experimental Studies

• In Event: 30.075 - The Meta-Analysis of Single-Subject Experimental Design Data: Methodological Challenges and Approaches

Abstract

In this study, we give a detailed description of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of data from single-subject experimental design (SSED) studies. We look at the study designs and characteristics of the SSED data from the primary studies and at methods of data analysis that are used to synthesize the data. The overall aim is to get a better understanding of the practice of reviewing SSED research, including how researchers report about it. A second aim is to inform methodological researchers on how data look like, allowing for instance to study relevant methodological questions or simulate realistic situations.
As a first step of this systemic review, we followed a six-step search process to identify all relevant reviews. First, a search for relevant reviews in previously published syntheses of reviews of single case experimental design studies was conducted (Maggin et al. 2011; Schlosser et al. 2008; Beretvas & Chung 2008; Shadish, Rindskopf & Hedges, 2008). Secondly, special issues on SSED (meta-)analysis were looked into. Third, bibliographic databases were looked into (PsychINFO, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, MEDLINE, ERIC, CINAHL). Fourth, with the intention of avoiding biases, grey literature (i.e. non-published literature) was searched as well. In order to trace grey literature and dissertations and theses, ten databases were searched: the CORDIS Library, EdITLib, the Grey Literature Database of the Canadian Evaluation Society, the Index of Conference Proceedings, the Index to Theses in Great Britain and Ireland, IBSS, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, SSRN eLibrary, SIGLE, Theses Canada. Fifth, the tables of content of 23 journals that showed up at least three times were searched thoroughly. Finally, the reference lists and the citation indexes of all found articles were checked. The authors were contacted, the websites of the authors were searched or the articles were bought via payment websites when there was no access to an article. This initial search generated a list of 647 reviews.
The inclusion criteria are: the syntheses had to focus on human participants; the review had to be published between 1985 and 2015; the studies should be the quantitative reviews of at least 2 SSED studies; and, finally, the syntheses had to report an outcome measure in the form of a numerical summary of the effect over all SSED studies. Reviews that include group studies and SSED studies were included in our review, as long as the authors tried to integrate the findings of the SSED studies. We excluded the studies that were commentaries, qualitative case studies, randomized controlled group trials, and methodological studies. After evaluating the inclusion criteria in retrieved studies, 201 articles were included in our review.
In this poster, we will give a detailed overview of these SSED reviews.

Authors

• Laleh Jamshidi, KU Leuven

• Mieke Heyvaert, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven

• Wim Van den Noortgate, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven