Unequal phase lengths single-case metrics require explicit point and pair denominators. PND and PEM divide by intervention observations, while NAP and uncorrected Tau use baseline count times intervention count. Different phase sizes change possible score increments and null behavior. Report actual phase lengths, missingness, tie rules, and design structure rather than applying one universal cutoff across datasets.

Report planned and valid lengths

Show intended observations, collected observations, invalid points, and final n for every phase. Preserve reasons for early stopping or extension.

Map each metric denominator

List intervention-point denominators for PND and PEM and cross-phase pair denominators for NAP and Tau. Recalculate after any data correction.

Show possible increments

Explain how one point or pair changes the score at the observed phase sizes. Avoid implying more precision than the denominator allows.

Review missingness by phase

Missing data concentrated near a phase change or in one condition can alter overlap and trend. Keep those patterns visible.

Avoid universal thresholds

Decision accuracy can vary with phase size and design structure. Use preplanned, context-appropriate interpretation and repeated design evidence.

Build Zoya's phase-denominator map

Start with a locked worklist for Zoya. Record the review question, metric name, formula version, phase labels, improvement direction, planned and valid observations, missing or invalid states, tie handling, trend handling, source timestamps, calculation owner, and review date. The unequal-phase metric review result should be reproducible from this worklist without relying on an unlabeled dashboard value. Keep the data in their original unit so reviewers can connect the supplement to the graph and to the actual outcome. For the unequal phase lengths single-case metrics question, Zoya's reviewer also records the release criterion, expected evidence, unresolved limitations, and exact action that the result may inform. This small decision log prevents a calculation from becoming an open-ended label and lets a later reviewer distinguish the observed value from the judgment made with it.

Work the calculation for Zoya

Zoya has 3 baseline points and 9 intervention points. PND and PEM each use 9 intervention points, so their smallest nonzero step is 1/9, or 11.1 percentage points. NAP and uncorrected Tau use 3 times 9, or 27 cross-phase pairs, though tied or repeated values can make score changes uneven. Show every intermediate count or statistic at enough precision to reproduce the displayed result. Keep the raw phase values in chronological order beside any sorted, paired, or transformed table. The fictional arithmetic illustrates the method; it does not create a clinical threshold, minimum phase size, or promised treatment effect.

Audit Zoya's denominator and formula

Zoya's denominator map records nA=3, nB=9, 27 pair comparisons, and each metric's actual denominator. It separates planned phase length from valid phase length and shows that one missing intervention point would change the point denominator to 8 and pair denominator to 24. The audit also checks duplicate timestamps, silent imputation, phase-boundary drift, direction reversal, premature rounding, spreadsheet ranges, software version, and correction history. Any unresolved source discrepancy stays on hold with an owner and due date instead of being converted into a convenient zero or exclusion.

Watch for the main failure mode in Zoya's review

A template that hard-codes ten intervention points can silently report the wrong percentage. Another error compares 100% from two points with 100% from twenty points as though they have identical resolution. Zoya's table blocks release until the actual valid counts drive every formula. Reviewers should be able to see how one point, tie, extreme, missing observation, or phase-length decision affects the result. A sensitivity example is labeled as hypothetical and never mixed with observed evidence.

Integrate the metric with visual and design analysis for Zoya

The team examines why phases differ in length, whether stopping rules were predeclared, where data are missing, and whether enough observations and design demonstrations support the question. Sensitivity to phase size is reported beside the raw graph. The WWC Version 5.0 handbook is a research evidence standard, so its design criteria are not a universal clinical protocol. In care, the responsible clinician also considers current assessment evidence, professional scope, the treatment plan, ordinary supports, risk, and the person's choices.

Protect client relevance and access for Zoya

During Zoya's supplemental metrics with different phase sizes review, keep augmentative and alternative communication, interpreters, mobility, food, water, bathroom use, prescribed care, health support, rest, relationships, and emergency help available. Use accessible communication to ask whether the goal, direction, magnitude, burden, and observed change matter to Zoya. A favorable coefficient cannot repair an unwanted target, inaccessible measurement process, unsafe plan, or missing consent and assent process.

Use current evidence within scope for Zoya

For Zoya's unequal-phase metric review review, the BACB ethics hub and CASP public summary provide professional context, while the BCBA Test Content Outline supplies examination scope for measurement, graphing, interpretation, experimental design, and data-based evaluation. A single-case methods review describes common overlap, Tau, and two-SD calculations. Decision-accuracy research shows why phase size and design structure matter and why overlap percentages do not measure distance. A reproducibility tutorial documents ambiguity among Tau-U implementations and baseline corrections. Nonoverlap and mean-difference methods explain their distinct information targets. ASHA supports continuous access to AAC tools or devices.

Close Zoya's supplemental analysis review

Review the phase-denominator map with Zoya and the responsible qualified clinician. Preserve source data, graph, phase definitions, calculation specification, coverage, ties, uncertainty, limitations, client input, selected action, owner, and next review date. Reopen the analysis when the measure, phase, context, access, health, goal, software, or design changes. The final note should make clear which conclusions are supported, which remain uncertain, and which require different evidence.

Related resources

Sources