Methoden vergleichen

	Single-blind single-subject experimental design	Randomisierte kontrollierte Studie mit einfacher Verblindung
Fachgebiet	Versuchsplanung	Versuchsplanung
Familie	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Entstehungsjahr	1970s–1984 (consolidated)	1948 (formalized); single-blind variant established in mid-20th century clinical trial methodology
Urheber	Barlow & Hersen (single-subject methodology); blinding conventions from clinical trial tradition	Bradford Hill and colleagues (MRC streptomycin trial, 1948); blinding conventions codified in CONSORT guidelines
Typ	Controlled experimental design variant	Experimental design — blinded randomized trial
Wegweisende Quelle	Barlow, D. H., & Hersen, M. (1984). Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change (2nd ed.). Pergamon Press. ISBN: 978-0080302378	Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., Moher, D., & CONSORT Group. (2010). CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ, 340, c332.
Aliasnamen	single-blind N-of-1 design, SB-SSED, single-blind within-subject design, single-blind single-case experimental design	single-masked RCT, single-blind RCT, single-blind trial, SB-RCT
Verwandt	6	5
Zusammenfassung	A single-blind single-subject experimental design (SB-SSED) applies a single-blind protocol to an N-of-1 experiment: one individual participant is studied intensively across alternating or sequential phases, and either the participant or the assessor — but not both — is kept unaware of the current treatment condition. This design combines the idiographic power of single-subject methodology with a structured blinding control to reduce performance or assessment bias, and is common in applied behavior analysis, clinical psychology, and rehabilitation research.	A single-blind randomized controlled trial (SB-RCT) is a rigorous experimental design in which participants are randomly assigned to treatment or control conditions while remaining unaware of which condition they have received. Investigators, outcome assessors, and data analysts are not blinded. By masking participants, the design eliminates placebo and nocebo response biases on the participant side, while preserving investigator flexibility to administer and monitor the intervention.