Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Pragmaattinen yksittäisen kohteen kokeellinen muotoilu× | [KÄÄNNÖS PUUTTUU]× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Koesuunnittelu | Koesuunnittelu |
| Menetelmäperhe | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 1960s–1970s (SSED roots); pragmatic framing prominent from 1990s onward | 1967 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Applied behavior analysis tradition (Sidman, Baer, Wolf, Risley); pragmatic adaptation from clinical research | Daniel Schwartz and Joseph Lellouch |
| Tyyppi≠ | Single-case experimental design variant | Experimental design — pragmatic trial |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Kazdin, A. E. (2011). Single-Case Research Designs: Methods for Clinical and Applied Settings (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN: 978-0195341881 | Schwartz, D., & Lellouch, J. (1967). Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 20(8), 637–648. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | pragmatic SSED, pragmatic N-of-1 design, real-world single-case design, applied single-subject experimental design | pRCT, pragmatic trial, practical clinical trial, real-world RCT |
| Liittyvät≠ | 6 | 4 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | Pragmatic single-subject experimental design applies the logic of single-case experimentation — repeated measurement, baseline comparison, and phase manipulation — within real-world practice settings rather than controlled laboratories. It allows practitioners and clinicians to rigorously evaluate interventions for individual participants without requiring large samples, making it especially valuable in applied, clinical, and educational contexts where heterogeneity across individuals is high. | A pragmatic randomized controlled trial (pRCT) tests whether an intervention works under ordinary, real-world conditions — broad eligibility, flexible delivery, and routine care settings. Participants are still randomly assigned to treatment or control, preserving causal inference, but the study is designed to reflect the diversity and variability of actual practice rather than the ideal conditions of an explanatory trial. The defining framework is the PRECIS-2 tool, which maps any RCT along nine pragmatic-to-explanatory dimensions. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|