随机对照试验阅读流畅性干预研究质量指标的系统评价

IF 1.5 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
N. Naveenkumar, George K. Georgiou, Ana Paula Alves Vieira, Sandra Romero, R. Parrila
{"title":"随机对照试验阅读流畅性干预研究质量指标的系统评价","authors":"N. Naveenkumar, George K. Georgiou, Ana Paula Alves Vieira, Sandra Romero, R. Parrila","doi":"10.1080/10573569.2021.1961647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Although several studies have examined the effectiveness of reading fluency interventions, the methodological rigor of these studies remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to examine the quality of randomized controlled trial (RCT) reading fluency intervention studies using the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) standards. Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for the review. All included studies met the four quality indicators for context and setting, participants, intervention agent, and data analysis. In addition, 22 out of the 26 studies met the quality indicators for internal validity and implementation fidelity, and 18 met the quality indicator for outcome measure. Finally, 16 of the studies met all eight quality indicators, and the majority of them also reported significant effects on reading fluency outcomes. Findings and future directions are discussed considering the quality indicators for methodologically rigorous reading fluency intervention studies.","PeriodicalId":51619,"journal":{"name":"Reading & Writing Quarterly","volume":"38 1","pages":"359 - 378"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Review on Quality Indicators of Randomized Control Trial Reading Fluency Intervention Studies\",\"authors\":\"N. Naveenkumar, George K. Georgiou, Ana Paula Alves Vieira, Sandra Romero, R. Parrila\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10573569.2021.1961647\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Although several studies have examined the effectiveness of reading fluency interventions, the methodological rigor of these studies remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to examine the quality of randomized controlled trial (RCT) reading fluency intervention studies using the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) standards. Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for the review. All included studies met the four quality indicators for context and setting, participants, intervention agent, and data analysis. In addition, 22 out of the 26 studies met the quality indicators for internal validity and implementation fidelity, and 18 met the quality indicator for outcome measure. Finally, 16 of the studies met all eight quality indicators, and the majority of them also reported significant effects on reading fluency outcomes. Findings and future directions are discussed considering the quality indicators for methodologically rigorous reading fluency intervention studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reading & Writing Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"359 - 378\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reading & Writing Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2021.1961647\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading & Writing Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2021.1961647","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

摘要尽管一些研究已经检验了阅读流利性干预的有效性,但这些研究的方法学严谨性仍不清楚。本研究的目的是使用特殊儿童委员会(CEC)标准检查随机对照试验(RCT)阅读流利性干预研究的质量。26项研究符合审查的纳入标准。所有纳入的研究都符合背景和环境、参与者、干预剂和数据分析的四个质量指标。此外,26项研究中有22项符合内部有效性和实施保真度的质量指标,18项符合结果衡量的质量指标。最后,16项研究符合所有8项质量指标,其中大多数研究还报告了对阅读流利性结果的显著影响。考虑到方法上严格的阅读流利性干预研究的质量指标,讨论了研究结果和未来的方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Systematic Review on Quality Indicators of Randomized Control Trial Reading Fluency Intervention Studies
Abstract Although several studies have examined the effectiveness of reading fluency interventions, the methodological rigor of these studies remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to examine the quality of randomized controlled trial (RCT) reading fluency intervention studies using the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) standards. Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for the review. All included studies met the four quality indicators for context and setting, participants, intervention agent, and data analysis. In addition, 22 out of the 26 studies met the quality indicators for internal validity and implementation fidelity, and 18 met the quality indicator for outcome measure. Finally, 16 of the studies met all eight quality indicators, and the majority of them also reported significant effects on reading fluency outcomes. Findings and future directions are discussed considering the quality indicators for methodologically rigorous reading fluency intervention studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信