Cited by 43Mental Health Research TopicsStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Analysing N-of-1 observational data in health psychology and behavioural medicine: A 10-step SPSS tutorial for beginners

Open access
McDonald, Suzanne, Vieira, Rute, Johnston, Derek W.·2020·Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Background: N-of-1 observational studies can be used to describe natural intra-individual changes in health-related behaviours or symptoms over time, to test behavioural theories and to develop highly personalised health interventions. To date, N-of-1 observational methods have been under-used in health psychology and behavioural medicine. One reason for this may be the perceived complexity of statistical analysis of N-of-1 data.Objective: This tutorial paper describes a 10-step procedure for the analysis of N-of-1 observational data using dynamic regression modelling in SPSS for researchers, students and clinicians who are new to this area. The 10-step procedure is illustrated using real data from an N-of-1 observational study exploring the relationship between pain and physical activity.Conclusion: The availability of a user-friendly and robust statistical technique for the analysis of N-of-1 data using SPSS may foster increased awareness, knowledge and skills and establish N-of-1 designs as a useful methodological tool in health psychology and behavioural medicine.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/21642850.2019.1711096

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A clear consensus to address missing data in SCEDs does not yet exist nor does it feature under the SCRIBE reporting guidelines or risk of bias tools for SCEDs.

    “Moreover, a clear consensus to address missing data in SCEDs does not yet exist nor does it feature under the SCRIBE reporting guidelines or risk of bias tools for SCEDs [83,84,85,86].”

    From Brief and Telehealth Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) Interventions for Stress in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD): A Series of Single Case Experimental Design (SCED) Studies (2022) · cites this paper as [85]

    Step 2, “identify and impute missing data” (page not provided), explicitly says there is no consensus on addressing missingness in N-of-1 studies. The paper cites the SCRIBE guideline and a risk-of-bias scale in its References, but our copy does not say whether missing-data guidance features in either one. That part of the claim is not supported by this source. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McDonald, S., Vieira, R., & Johnston, D. W.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
Corresponding author
McDonald, Suzanne
Venue
Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine
Published
2020-01-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
32-54
ISSN
2164-2850 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3002069580
Cited by
43
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 3
FWCI
6.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Menzies Centre for Australian Studies, King’s College London, University of London
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
N-of-1 design, within-person variability, pain, physical activity, health behavior change

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review