Módszerek összehasonlítása

	Rapid Assessment Instrument	Single-System Design
Tudományterület	Social Work	Social Work
Módszercsalád	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Keletkezés éve	2002	2009
Megalkotó	Walter W. Hudson and the clinical-measurement tradition; codified by Springer, Abell & Hudson	Martin Bloom, Joel Fischer & John G. Orme (codification in social work)
Típus	Brief, standardized, self-report measure for repeated use in practice	Time-series design for evaluating intervention with a single client system
Alapmű	Springer, D. W., Abell, N., & Hudson, W. W. (2002). Creating and validating rapid assessment instruments for practice and research: Part 1. Research on Social Work Practice, 12(3), 408–439.	Bloom, M., Fischer, J., & Orme, J. G. (2009). Evaluating Practice: Guidelines for the Accountable Professional (6th ed.). Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. ISBN: 9780205458066
Alternatív nevek	RAI, Rapid Assessment Instruments, Brief Standardized Self-Report Scale, Clinical Measurement Package Scales	Single-Subject Design, Single-Case Design, N-of-1 Design, Single-System Evaluation
Kapcsolódó	4	4
Összefoglaló	A rapid assessment instrument (RAI) is a short, standardized, self-report measure designed to be completed quickly and repeatedly so that a social worker can assess the magnitude of a client's problem, compare it against a validated clinical cutoff, and monitor change over the course of an intervention. The format was championed by Walter Hudson, whose Clinical Measurement Package scales set the template, and was systematized for practitioners by Springer, Abell, and Hudson, who laid out how to create and validate such instruments for practice and research.	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.