Methoden vergleichen

	Reliable Change Index	Single-System Design
Fachgebiet	Social Work	Social Work
Familie	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Entstehungsjahr	1991	2009
Urheber	Neil S. Jacobson & Paula Truax	Martin Bloom, Joel Fischer & John G. Orme (codification in social work)
Typ	Statistical index of whether an individual client's change exceeds measurement error	Time-series design for evaluating intervention with a single client system
Wegweisende Quelle	Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59(1), 12–19.	Bloom, M., Fischer, J., & Orme, J. G. (2009). Evaluating Practice: Guidelines for the Accountable Professional (6th ed.). Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. ISBN: 9780205458066
Aliasnamen	RCI, Reliable Change Index (Jacobson-Truax), Jacobson-Truax Reliable Change, Reliable Change Criterion	Single-Subject Design, Single-Case Design, N-of-1 Design, Single-System Evaluation
Verwandt	4	4
Zusammenfassung	The Reliable Change Index (RCI) is a statistic that tells whether the change in an individual client's score on a measure, from before to after an intervention, is large enough that it is unlikely to be an artifact of the instrument's measurement error. Introduced by Neil Jacobson and Paula Truax in 1991 as one half of their two-part definition of clinically significant change, it converts a pre-post difference into a standardized value and compares it against a critical cutoff, typically 1.96, so that practitioners and researchers can classify each client as reliably improved, unchanged, or reliably deteriorated.	A single-system design is a time-series approach to evaluating practice in which a single client system — an individual, family, group, or organization — is measured repeatedly on a clearly defined target before and during (and sometimes after) an intervention. By tracking the same system over time rather than comparing a treatment group to a control group, it lets a practitioner judge whether their own intervention is associated with change in the people they actually serve. It is the methodological backbone of the 'accountable professional' tradition codified by Bloom, Fischer, and Orme.