In single-case DRC data, after reversal students showed faster change from baseline to intervention, and goal type (on-task versus disruptive) did not differentially affect outcomes¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? After reversal, students sped up the change from baseline to intervention by approximately 6 percentage points (β = 6.09, p < .01). → Pyle 2017 q3 i? No significant differences in treatment effect were found between on-task and disruptive goal types. → Pyle 2017 (2)

Evidence¶

Pyle 2017¶

Pyle, K. K., & Fabiano, G. A. (2017). Daily Report Card Intervention and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Studies. Manuscript submitted to Exceptional Children October 2016; accepted March 2017. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED583708

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Initial HLM model testing the Level 1 Order predictor (0 = first AB pair, 1 = second AB pair) in reversal studies. The quote states students "may show faster change from baseline to intervention" after reversal.

"This model demonstrated that after reversal, students may show faster change from baseline to intervention, speeding up the change by approximately 6 percentage points, β = 6.09, t(13) = 3.12, p < .01."

Pyle 2017 (2)¶

Pyle, K. K., & Fabiano, G. A. (2017). Daily Report Card Intervention and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Studies. Manuscript submitted to Exceptional Children October 2016; accepted March 2017. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED583708

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Initial HLM model comparing treatment effects for on-task versus disruptive outcomes; no significant difference (equivalence not tested). All outcomes had been converted so higher percentages were more desirable.

"Finally, we examined whether there were differences in the treatment effect due to the goal type (on-task versus disruptive). No significant differences were found between the goal types, β = 7.58, t(13) = 1.41, p = .18."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The Daily Report Card significantly improves behavior for students with ADHD, increasing desirable behavior by approximately 30 percentage points from baseline to intervention — related
• Class type moderated DRC outcomes, with the single special-education study showing approximately 33 percentage points greater gains, though only one study was in this subgroup — related
• Higher study quality is associated with greater behavioral gains from the DRC in students with ADHD — related
• Neither age nor gender significantly moderated DRC treatment effects, though subgroup samples were small — related
• Home-school communication was not significantly related to DRC outcomes for students with ADHD, contrary to a prior meta-analysis — related
• Non-overlap-based effect sizes averaging 0.59 to 0.94 support the DRC as a moderate- to highly-effective stand-alone intervention for students with ADHD — related