Re-imagining a SCED Design for Evaluating the Impact of Brain in Hand in Neurodivergent People
Why we did the study
We wanted to try a new and innovative approach to measuring the impact of Brain in Hand so partnered up with researchers at Exeter University who had experience in Single Case Experimental Design (SCEDs) to see if this methodology would work for autistic people.
How we carried out the study
We asked 17 people to complete a short three question survey related to (1) working on their goals, (2) copying with challenges and (3) how they were feeling that day five times a week over a 12 week period (before and after receiving access to Brain in Hand).
Main findings
Design issues emerged that meant for many of the participants in the research study a “ceiling effect” occurred (they scored at the top of the scale so quickly that we couldn't measure any further improvement or changes) and the effect sizes were small.
The three design issues were:
(1) limiting the choice of the outcome scores to a short range (1 to 5)
(2) outcome measures not being the most meaningful for participants and
(3) short duration of the study.
What we are taking forwards as learnings
A survey of the participants of the research provided us with insights on how we could have improved the design of the study suggesting
-
a 10 point scale with words not numbers,
-
outcome measures that were more focused and
-
collected over a 6 month period but less frequently.
These vital insights encouraged us to try this approach again with more appropriate outcomes measures and scales that were codesigned by neurodivergent people and had journalling at its core. The findings of this new research will be shared in another paper.