Choosing And Using Single-System Design For Many People

Choosing And Using Single-System Designmany People Receiv

Discuss the appropriateness of the single-system (subject) design used in the case study of social workers evaluating their practice approaches, particularly focusing on the case management with solution-focused and task-centered methods. Analyze whether this study design effectively measures the intervention’s impact on client outcomes, considering the types of measurements used and their correspondence to treatment objectives. Evaluate what new knowledge or evidence of efficacy the study provides for these approaches. Assess whether the design’s measurement tools adequately capture changes and whether the outcome supports adopting these models broadly. Offer recommendations for improving the study if it were to be submitted to an evidence-based practice registry, and provide a rationale for these suggestions.

Paper For Above instruction

The case study presents a compelling example of applying a single-system (or single-subject) research design within a geriatric case management context, which reflects current trends and practices in evidence-based social work. The critique of this design involves examining how well it functions to evaluate treatment effects, considering factors such as measurement validity, reliability, and applicability to real-world settings.

First, the choice of a multiple-baseline single-case design appears appropriate in this context because it allows for individual-level analysis of change over time, which is especially relevant given the variability inherent among older adults' health and psychosocial conditions. This design minimizes threats to internal validity, such as maturation or history effects, through staggered implementation across clients. In George's case, participation in the design enabled detailed observation of how targeted interventions impact specific problems, such as mobility and safety, providing nuanced data often lost in larger sample studies (Thyer, 2010).

However, the measurement tools utilized—clinical rating scales adapted from the task-centered model—merit further discussion concerning their validity and sensitivity. These 10-point scales, while user-friendly and practical in clinical settings, may suffer from subjective bias, inconsistent interpretation, and limited sensitivity to small but meaningful changes (Tankersley, Cook, & Cook, 2008). The correspondence between the numerical scales and actual client progress depends heavily on the clinician's calibration and the client's active participation. When measuring complex constructs like problem severity or task completion, multi-dimensional tools, such as standardized assessment instruments with established psychometric properties, could enhance measurement rigor (Corcoran & Hozack, 2010).

The study contributes valuable preliminary evidence supporting the efficacy of the solution-focused and task-centered models for older adult clients exhibiting specific functional limitations. The documented improvements in problem scores and task completion suggest these approaches can yield measurable benefits, aligning with prior research findings that emphasize goal-oriented, brief intervention strategies (Mattaini, 2010). Nonetheless, the single-case data, while compelling on an individual level, limits generalizability. For this evidence to be robust and suitable for wider dissemination, additional empirical rigor is needed.

To improve the study's strength and ensure it meets standards for evidence-based practice registry submission, several methodological enhancements are recommended. First, employing standardized, validated measurement instruments—such as the Geriatric Depression Scale or the Barthel Index—would improve result reliability and comparability with other studies (Dudley, 2014). Second, incorporating functional outcome measures and qualitative data could provide a richer understanding of progress and client satisfaction. Third, ensuring inter-rater reliability through training and calibration sessions among clinicians would reduce measurement bias (Tankersley et al., 2008). Fourth, conducting follow-up assessments beyond the initial intervention period would assess sustainability of outcome changes, critical for supporting lasting practice changes (Corcoran & Hozack, 2010).

In sum, while the single-subject design is appropriate for initial exploration and individual client evaluation, augmenting the measurement strategy and ensuring rigorous methodological procedures can substantially strengthen the evidence base. Such enhancements would better demonstrate causal relationships between intervention and outcome, facilitating broader adoption of effective case management models within social work practice. Careful implementation of standardized tools, reliability checks, and longitudinal tracking are essential to elevate this research into a more universally accepted evidence base.

References

• Corcoran, K., & Hozack, N. (2010). Locating assessment instruments. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2nd ed., pp. 65–74). Sage Publications.
• Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.). Lyceum Books.
• Mattaini, M. A. (2010). Single-system studies. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2nd ed., pp. 241–273). Sage Publications.
• Tankersley, M., Cook, B. G., & Cook, L. (2008). A preliminary examination to identify the presence of quality indicators in single-subject research. Education & Treatment of Children, 31(4), 523–548.
• Thyer, B. (2010). Single system research: Principles and procedures. Springer Publishing.
• Northouse, P. G. (2018). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practice (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen, S. (2014). Social work case studies: Concentration year. Laureate International Universities Publishing.
• Corcoran, K., & Hozack, N. (2010). Locating assessment instruments. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2nd ed., pp. 65–74). Sage Publications.
• Mattaini, M. A. (2010). Single-system studies. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2nd ed., pp. 241–273). Sage Publications.
• Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen, S. (2014). Social work case studies: Concentration year. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing.