加拿大健康学论文代写：自闭症干预治疗
这项研究基本上采用了单学科设计。由Ottenbacher(1986年)提出的单一主题设计有助于分析持续治疗的治疗效果。这项研究也考虑了一个单一的客户;因此，这项研究比多个参与者的研究更经济。研究的方法是，考虑到参与者的干预和干预结果(利益)，而不是只收集需要的数据。其次，研究可以观察到持续治疗的益处，数据的可变性是在必要时检查的里程碑。在多个参与者的情况下，即使是不经济或可行的情况下，也不可能同时与多个参与者一起工作，并在每日或每周的基础上记录他们的治疗。
其次，研究人员指出，这是一种干涉主义技术，在很短的时间内进行，结果被记录，干预可以在时间空间内进行调整。这种短时间跨度对于想要模拟干预的临床医生来说是一个优势。通常，临床医生和接近他们的人是受时间限制或经济约束的(雅各布森，et al .，1998)。然而，这种研究方法对他们来说更可行。格林斯潘和韦德尔(2005年)等研究人员的工作时间更长。将近10到15年之后，干预的收益被记录下来。
这项研究的局限性在于，单个学科所产生的结果可能无法推广到一个群体。对于一群患有自闭症的儿童来说，有必要使用更广泛的样本。此外，这项研究只考虑了一个患有自闭症相关缺陷的儿童，该图谱涵盖了许多问题，研究可能需要在干预的效果被全面采用之前进行测试。
加拿大健康学论文代写：自闭症干预治疗
The study basically used a single-subject design. The single subject design as argued by Ottenbacher (1986) is helpful for analysis of therapeutic effectiveness of continuous treatment. The study also takes into account a single client; hence, the study is also more economical than multiple participant studies. The methodological strength of the study is that it takes into account all details with respect to a participant’s intervention and intervention outcome (benefits) instead of collecting only data that is required. Secondly, the study can observe continuous treatment benefits, data variability is checked over milestones as and when necessary. In the case of multiple participants, it would not have been economical or feasible even otherwise to work with multiple participants at once and record their treatments on a daily or weekly basis.
Secondly as researcher indicates this is an interventionist technique that is conducted in a very short time span and results are recorded and intervention can be adjusted within the time space. This short time span is an advantage for clinicians who want to emulate the intervention. Normally clinicians and people approaching them are time constrained or financially constrained (Jacobson, et al., 1998). However, this study approach is more feasible for them. The work of researchers such as Greenspan & Wieder (2005) is conducted over much longer time. Almost nearly 10 to 15 years after, the intervention benefits are recorded.
The limitation of the study is that the results that are generated for a single subject may not be generalized for a group. For application to a group of children with autism, it will be necessary to work with a much broader sample. Also the study has only considered a child with specific autism related deficiencies, the spectrum covers many issues and the study might need to be tested before the efficacy of the intervention can be adopted holistically.
