No abstract

Context: Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) is a person-centered and collaborative approach, allowing to assess the effectiveness of an intervention on personally relevant goals. However, GAS is not a “scale” but a heterogeneous group of methodologies, including many variations and lack of consensus on high quality GAS. Objective: The aim of this communication is to: 1. provide updated didactical information on GAS use in PRM practice and research; 2. increase awareness of GAS methodological challenges; 3. guide use of GAS as an integrated process of rehabilitation after goal setting and; 4. provide updated resources for self-directed learning and extensive supplemental material to increase knowledge and practical skills in GAS use.Methods: Educational literature review about current GAS applications relevant to PRM fields. Results: Practical advice is provided regarding clinical challenges in GAS: definition of 0 level, time-frame and means employed to attain the goal, dealing with unforeseen pattern of improvement, synthesizing the numerous significations of “SMART” goal acronym to guide best use of GAS, and thinking flexibility on the type of relevant goals that can be set. Challenges with GAS in rehabilitation research are presented in order to promote researcher’s and reviewer’s awareness on reliable use of GAS and encouraging best-use of GAS. LAY ABSTRACTThe goal attainment scaling methodology is a relevant way of measuring the effectiveness of a treatment, by creating scales to measure whether the goals previously identified with the person have been achieved through the treatment. There are many goal attainment scaling methodological variants, with a significant impact on results, of which users are not always aware. The aims of this review of the literature regarding current applications of goal attainment scaling in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine fields, are to  (i) provide up-to-date didactic information on the use of goal attainment scaling in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine practice and research; (ii) raise awareness of the methodological challenges of goal attainment scaling; (iii) guide the use of goal attainment scaling to support the rehabilitation process after goal setting; and (iv) provide up-to-date resources for self-directed training. Practical guidelines are provided for the use of goal attainment scaling in clinical practice, and the challenges of use of this methodology in rehabilitation research are presented in order to educate researchers and evaluators on the reliable use of goal attainment scaling.

One of the data features that are expected to be assessed when analyzing single-case experimental designs (SCED) data is trend. The current text deals with four different questions that applied researchers can ask themselves when assessing trend, under the premise that there is not a single correct answer to each of these questions. First, there are multiple ways in which even linear trend can be operatively defined. Second, different criteria can be followed when deciding whether the trend observed needs to be taken into account when assessing intervention effectiveness or, in contrast, its magnitude is sufficiently small to be considered inconsequential. If a decision is made to take trend into account, there are different ways in which this can be done. Finally, a challenge arises when there is a trend for some of the comparisons between conditions, but not for others. Several options are reviewed for each of these questions in the context of real data, and tentative recommendations are provided. A new user-friendly website is developed to implement the options for fitting a trend line and a criterion for selecting a specific technique for that purpose. Trend-related and more general data analytical recommendations are provided for applied researchers.