{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.006700167504187605, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.1020408163265305, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Objectifying the Single Case Study

The group comparison type of investigation and the traditional case study are both criticized as being of limited value to the clinician faced with an individual patient. A plea is made for a compromise in which individually tailored assessment devices are designed for particular cases and are then subjected to statistical procedures analysing the results. In this way the requirements of relevance and objectivity may both be satisfied. The approach is illustrated by means of a single case study of depression and the results and implications are discussed.