方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| Standardized Clinical Cutoff× | Single-System Design× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | Social Work | Social Work |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1991 | 2009 |
| 提出者≠ | Neil S. Jacobson & Paula Truax | Martin Bloom, Joel Fischer & John G. Orme (codification in social work) |
| 类型≠ | Method for judging whether individual change on a standardized measure is reliable and clinically meaningful | Time-series design for evaluating intervention with a single client system |
| 开创性文献≠ | 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. DOI ↗ | Bloom, M., Fischer, J., & Orme, J. G. (2009). Evaluating Practice: Guidelines for the Accountable Professional (6th ed.). Pearson/Allyn & Bacon. ISBN: 9780205458066 |
| 别名 | Clinical Cutoff Score, Clinical Significance Method, Reliable Change Index, Jacobson-Truax Method | Single-Subject Design, Single-Case Design, N-of-1 Design, Single-System Evaluation |
| 相关≠ | 3 | 4 |
| 摘要≠ | The standardized clinical cutoff approach, developed by Jacobson and Truax, judges whether an individual client's change on a standardized measure is both statistically reliable and clinically meaningful. It pairs a Reliable Change Index — which asks whether a pre-to-post change is larger than the measurement error of the instrument — with a cutoff score that marks the boundary between the dysfunctional and functional (normal) populations. A client who moves reliably across that cutoff is counted as recovered, giving practice and research a defensible, individual-level definition of meaningful improvement. | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|