scholarly journals The Relationship Between Study Quality and the Effects of Supplemental Reading Interventions: A Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-366
Author(s):  
Christy R. Austin ◽  
Jeanne Wanzek ◽  
Nancy K. Scammacca ◽  
Sharon Vaughn ◽  
Samantha A. Gesel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reading Skills ◽  
Reading Interventions ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Statistical Treatment ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Type I ◽  
Supplemental Reading ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Standardized Measures ◽  
Treatment Type

Empirical studies investigating supplemental reading interventions for students with or at risk for reading disabilities in the early elementary grades have demonstrated a range of effect sizes. Identifying the findings from high-quality research can provide greater certainty of findings related to the effectiveness of supplemental reading interventions. This meta-analysis investigated how four variables of study quality (study design, statistical treatment, Type I error, and fidelity of implementation) were related to effect sizes from standardized measures of foundational reading skills and language and comprehension. The results from 88 studies indicated that year of publication was a significant predictor of effect sizes for both standardized measures of foundational reading skills and language and comprehension, with more recent studies demonstrating smaller effect sizes. Results also demonstrated that with the exception of research design predicting effect sizes on foundational reading skills measures, study quality was not related to the effects of supplemental reading interventions. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Are Reading Interventions for English Language Learners Effective? A Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 220-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caralyn Ludwig ◽  
Kan Guo ◽  
George K. Georgiou
Keyword(s):  
English Language Learners ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Reading Fluency ◽  
English Language ◽  
Reading Skills ◽  
Word Reading ◽  
Reading Interventions ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Reading Accuracy ◽  
Positive Effects

Despite concerted efforts to improve the reading skills of English language learners (ELLs), it remains unclear if the interventions they have been receiving produce any positive results. Thus, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine how effective reading interventions are in improving ELLs’ reading skills and what factors may influence their effectiveness. Twenty-six studies with reported outcomes for pretest and posttest were selected, and four moderators (group size, intensity of intervention, students’ risk status, and type of intervention) were coded. The results of random-effects analyses showed that the reading interventions had a large effect on ELLs’ reading accuracy ( d = 1.221) and reading fluency ( d = 0.802) and a moderate effect on reading comprehension ( d = 0.499). In addition, for real-word reading accuracy, intervention groups composed of more than five students were less effective than groups composed of two to five students, and longer intervention sessions were less effective than shorter ones. Overall, our findings suggest that reading interventions have positive effects on ELLs’ reading skills, and they should not be delayed until these students have reached a certain level of oral English proficiency.

scholarly journals The Efficacy of Recasts in Language Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia L. Cleave ◽  
Stephanie D. Becker ◽  
Maura K. Curran ◽  
Amanda J. Owen Van Horne ◽  
Marc E. Fey
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Language Intervention ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Average Effect ◽  
Grammatical Development ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Study Designs

Purpose This systematic review and meta-analysis critically evaluated the research evidence on the effectiveness of conversational recasts in grammatical development for children with language impairments. Method Two different but complementary reviews were conducted and then integrated. Systematic searches of the literature resulted in 35 articles for the systematic review. Studies that employed a wide variety of study designs were involved, but all examined interventions where recasts were the key component. The meta-analysis only included studies that allowed the calculation of effect sizes, but it did include package interventions in which recasts were a major part. Fourteen studies were included, 7 of which were also in the systematic review. Studies were grouped according to research phase and were rated for quality. Results Study quality and thus strength of evidence varied substantially. Nevertheless, across all phases, the vast majority of studies provided support for the use of recasts. Meta-analyses found average effect sizes of .96 for proximal measures and .76 for distal measures, reflecting a positive benefit of about 0.75 to 1.00 standard deviation. Conclusion The available evidence is limited, but it is supportive of the use of recasts in grammatical intervention. Critical features of recasts in grammatical interventions are discussed.

Assessing Study Quality in Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 334-342
Author(s):  
Thomas Hugh Feeley
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Acceptable Standard ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Relationship Of

Abstract An assumption of meta-analyses is made with regard to the quality of the primary studies included for analysis. Specifically, the process assumes each study is a valid estimation of a hypothesized relationship of interest. In instances when a primary study's quality is below an acceptable standard, one option is for the study be excluded from further analyses. Alternatively, studies of acceptable merit could be further investigated through moderator analyses in an attempt to explain heterogeneity among effect sizes due to quality elements. The current essay discusses methods for evaluating study quality before proposing guidelines for their assessment. It is recommended that future meta-analyses in communication include a dedicated section detailing how study quality is addressed when reviewing studies for inclusion.

scholarly journals Group Differences Between Countries and Between Languages in Pain-Related Beliefs, Coping, and Catastrophizing in Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review

Pain Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. 1847-1862 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saurab Sharma ◽  
Alexandra Ferreira-Valente ◽  
Amanda C de C. Williams ◽  
J Haxby Abbott ◽  
José Pais-Ribeiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Pain Beliefs ◽  
Coping Responses ◽  
Language Groups ◽  
Country Differences

Abstract Objective To evaluate the extent to which pain-related beliefs, appraisals, coping, and catastrophizing differ between countries, language groups, and country economy. Design Systematic review. Methods Two independent reviewers searched 15 databases without restriction for date or language of publication. Studies comparing pain beliefs/appraisals, coping, or catastrophizing across two or more countries or language groups in adults with chronic pain (pain for longer than three months) were included. Two independent reviewers extracted data and performed the quality appraisal. Study quality was rated as low, moderate, or high using a 10-item modified STROBE checklist. Effect sizes were reported as small (0.20–0.49), medium (0.50–0.79), or large (≥0.80). Results We retrieved 1,365 articles, read 42 potential full texts, and included 10 (four moderate-quality, six low-quality) studies. A total of 6,797 adults with chronic pain (33% with chronic low back pain) were included from 16 countries. Meta-analysis was not performed because of heterogeneity in the studies. A total of 103 effect sizes were computed for individual studies, some of which indicated between-country differences in pain beliefs, coping, and catastrophizing. Of these, the majority of effect sizes for pain beliefs/appraisal (60%; eight large, eight medium, and eight small), for coping (60%; seven large, 11 medium, and 16 small), and for catastrophizing (50%; two medium, one small) evidenced statistically significant between-country differences, although study quality was low to moderate. Conclusions In 50% or more of the studies, mean scores in the measures of pain beliefs and appraisals, coping responses, and catastrophizing were significantly different between people from different countries.

Understanding the Dynamics of Dosage Response: A Nonlinear Meta-Analysis of Recent Reading Interventions

2021 ◽  
pp. 003465432110514
Author(s):  
Garrett J. Roberts ◽  
Denis G. Dumas ◽  
Daniel McNeish ◽  
Brooke Coté
Keyword(s):  
Reading Instruction ◽  
Effect Size ◽  
Reading Interventions ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Maximum Effect ◽  
Optimal Dosage ◽  
Intervention Effects ◽  
Parabolic Shape ◽  
Dosage Response Curve

Researchers have noted a nonlinear association between reading instruction dosage (i.e., hours of instruction) and reading outcomes for Grade K–3 students with reading difficulties (K–3 SWRD). In this article, we propose a nonlinear meta-analysis as a method to identify both the maximum effect size and optimal dosage of reading interventions for K–3 SWRD using 26 peer-reviewed studies including 186 effect sizes. Results suggested the effect sizes followed a concave parabolic shape, such that increasing dosage improved intervention effects until 39.92 hours of instruction (dmax = 0.77), after which the intervention effects declined. Moderator analyses found that maximum intervention effects on fluency outcomes were significantly larger (dmax = 1.34) than the overall maximum effect size. Also, when students received 1:1 instruction, the dosage response curve displayed a different functional form than the concave parabolic shape, showing the effect increased indefinitely after approximately 16.8 hours of instruction. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

scholarly journals Systematically Mapping Connection between Rapid Automatized Naming Task and Reading Performance: A Meta-analysis of Correlational Data

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-76
Author(s):  
Eugene Borokhovski ◽  
Robert M. Bernard ◽  
Norman Segalowitz ◽  
Anna Sokolovskaya
Keyword(s):  
Reading Skills ◽  
Reading Speed ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Weighted Average ◽  
Reading Performance ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Rapid Automatized Naming ◽  
Empirical Literature ◽  
Double Deficit Hypothesis ◽  
Double Deficit

Introduction. This meta-analytical study of primary research on early literacy explores and summarizes patterns of correlation between performance on Rapid Automatized Naming (RAN) task and measures of specific reading skills. This is the first large-scale meta-analysis intended to verify claims of the double-deficit hypothesis of relative independence of naming speed and phonological awareness factors in developmental dyslexia and to systematically map specific connection between RAN performance and various literacy competencies. Method. Two-hundred-forty-one primary studies identified through systematic searches of related empirical literature yielded 1551 effect sizes of two types – cross-sectional (correlations at the same time) and longitudinal (when measures of RAN and reading were considerably separated in time), reflecting RAN-to-reading correlations for seven independent outcome types. Results. The overall weighted average effect sizes were: r+ = 314, k = 1254 and r+ = 343, k = 297, respectively. Subsequent moderator variable analyses further explored RAN-to-reading associations dependent on RAN type, particular reading skills, age of learners and other factors. Among the strongest and most consistent in both sub-collections were correlation between symbolic RAN and reading speed and between non-symbolic RAN and reading comprehension, whereas both RAN types were strongly associated with decoding skills and reading composite measures. Discussion. Patterns of RAN-to-reading correlation provided insufficient support for the double-deficit hypothesis, but were suggestive of perceiving RAN as a measure of “pre-reading” skills, an “equal among equals” correlate of reading performance. The study also emphasizes the important role of both automatic and controlled cognitive processes for successful RAN task performance in its connection to reading competency.

scholarly journals Suggestibility in functional neurological disorder: A meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lillian Wieder ◽  
Richard J. Brown ◽  
Trevor Thompson ◽  
Devin B. Terhune
Keyword(s):  
Neurological Disorder ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Study Quality ◽  
Predisposing Factor ◽  
Search Results ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Functional Neurological Disorder

AbstractObjectiveResponsiveness to direct verbal suggestions (suggestibility) has long been hypothesized to represent a predisposing factor for functional neurological disorder (FND) but previous research has yielded conflicting results. The aim of this study was to quantitatively evaluate whether FND patients display elevated suggestibility relative to controls via meta-analysis.MethodsFour electronic databases were searched in November 2019, with the search updated in April 2020, for original studies assessing suggestibility using standardized behavioural scales or suggestive symptom induction protocols in FND patients and controls. The meta-analysis followed Cochrane, PRISMA, and MOOSE guidelines. Data extraction and study quality coding were performed by two independent reviewers. Standardized suggestibility scores and responsiveness to symptom induction protocols were used to calculate standardized mean differences (SMDs) between groups.ResultsOf 26,643 search results, 19 articles presenting 11 standardized suggestibility datasets (FND: n = 316; control: n = 360) and 11 symptom suggestibility datasets (FND: n = 1285; control: n = 1409) were included in random-effects meta-analyses. Meta-analyses revealed that FND patients displayed greater suggestibility than controls on standardized behavioural scales (SMD, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.15, 0.81]) and greater responsiveness to suggestive symptom induction (SMD, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.92, 1.86]). Moderation analyses presented mixed evidence regarding the extent to which effect sizes covaried with methodological differences across studies. No evidence of publication bias was found.ConclusionsThese results corroborate the hypothesis that FND is characterized by heightened responsiveness to verbal suggestion. Atypical suggestibility may confer risk for FND and be a cognitive marker that can inform diagnosis and treatment of this condition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document