Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT: 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/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/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.

SUBMITTER: Austin CR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6777867 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Austin Christy R CR Wanzek Jeanne J Scammacca Nancy K NK Vaughn Sharon S Gesel Samantha A SA Donegan Rachel R Engelmann Morgan M

Exceptional children 20180914 3

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 impleme ...[more]

PMID: 31588147

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare provider burnout is considered a factor in quality of care, yet little is known about the consistency and magnitude of this relationship. This meta-analysis examined relationships between provider burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment) and the quality (perceived quality, patient satisfaction) and safety of healthcare.MethodsPublications were identified through targeted literature searches in Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses through March of 2015. Two coders extracted data to calculate effect sizes and potential moderators. We calculated Pearson's r for all independent relationships between burnout and quality measures, using a random effects model. Data were assessed for potential impact of study rigor, outliers, and publication bias.ResultsEighty-two studies including 210,669 healthcare providers were included. Statistically significant negative relationships emerged between burnout and quality (r = -0.26, 95 % CI [-0.29, -0.23]) and safety (r = -0.23, 95 % CI [-0.28, -0.17]). In both cases, the negative relationship implied that greater burnout among healthcare providers was associated with poorer-quality healthcare and reduced safety for patients. Moderators for the quality relationship included dimension of burnout, unit of analysis, and quality data source. Moderators for the relationship between burnout and safety were safety indicator type, population, and country. Rigor of the study was not a significant moderator.DiscussionThis is the first study to systematically, quantitatively analyze the links between healthcare provider burnout and healthcare quality and safety across disciplines. Provider burnout shows consistent negative relationships with perceived quality (including patient satisfaction), quality indicators, and perceptions of safety. Though the effects are small to medium, the findings highlight the importance of effective burnout interventions for healthcare providers. Moderator analyses suggest contextual factors to consider for future study.

Project description:BACKGROUND: When multiple endpoints are of interest in evidence synthesis, a multivariate meta-analysis can jointly synthesise those endpoints and utilise their correlation. A multivariate random-effects meta-analysis must incorporate and estimate the between-study correlation (rhoB). METHODS: In this paper we assess maximum likelihood estimation of a general normal model and a generalised model for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis (BRMA). We consider two applied examples, one involving a diagnostic marker and the other a surrogate outcome. These motivate a simulation study where estimation properties from BRMA are compared with those from two separate univariate random-effects meta-analyses (URMAs), the traditional approach. RESULTS: The normal BRMA model estimates rhoB as -1 in both applied examples. Analytically we show this is due to the maximum likelihood estimator sensibly truncating the between-study covariance matrix on the boundary of its parameter space. Our simulations reveal this commonly occurs when the number of studies is small or the within-study variation is relatively large; it also causes upwardly biased between-study variance estimates, which are inflated to compensate for the restriction on rhoB. Importantly, this does not induce any systematic bias in the pooled estimates and produces conservative standard errors and mean-square errors. Furthermore, the normal BRMA is preferable to two normal URMAs; the mean-square error and standard error of pooled estimates is generally smaller in the BRMA, especially given data missing at random. For meta-analysis of proportions we then show that a generalised BRMA model is better still. This correctly uses a binomial rather than normal distribution, and produces better estimates than the normal BRMA and also two generalised URMAs; however the model may sometimes not converge due to difficulties estimating rhoB. CONCLUSION: A BRMA model offers numerous advantages over separate univariate synthesises; this paper highlights some of these benefits in both a normal and generalised modelling framework, and examines the estimation of between-study correlation to aid practitioners.

Project description:BackgroundThe relationship between procedural volume and outcomes for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) is contentious, with previous reviews suggesting an inverse volume-outcome relationship. The aim of this study was to systematically review contemporary evidence to re-examine this relationship.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to examine the relationship between PCI procedural volume (both at hospital- and operator-levels) and outcomes in adults. The primary outcome was mortality. The secondary outcomes were complications, healthcare utilisation and process outcomes. Searches were conducted from 1 January 2008 to 28 May 2019. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using 'Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations' (GRADE). Screening, data extraction, quality appraisal and GRADE assessments were conducted independently by two reviewers.ResultsOf 1,154 unique records retrieved, 22 observational studies with 6,432,265 patients were included. No significant association was found between total PCI hospital volume and mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-1.03, I 2 = 86%). A temporal trend from significant to non-significant pooled effect estimates was observed. The pooled effect estimate for mortality was found to be significantly in favour of high-volume operators for total PCI procedures (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.63-0.94, I 2 = 93%), and for high-volume hospitals for primary PCI procedures (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62-0.94, I 2 = 78%). Overall, GRADE certainty of evidence was 'very low'. There were mixed findings for secondary outcomes.ConclusionsA volume-outcome relationship may exist in certain situations, although this relationship appears to be attenuating with time, and there is 'very low' certainty of evidence. While volume might be important, it should not be the only standard used to define an acceptable PCI service and a broader evaluation of quality metrics should be considered that encompass patient experience and clinical outcomes. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, CRD42019125288.

Project description:PurposeIn this study, exercise interventions were evaluated for their effects on cancer-related fatigue (CRF) and quality of life (QoL) among cancer patients.DesignA meta-analysis was performed.MethodsWe systematically searched the PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases, and gray literature sources including the Virginia Henderson International Nursing Library and Google Scholar. This study only included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining how exercise interventions affect CRF and QoL among cancer patients. Based on the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Assessment Tool, version 2 (RoB 2) and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, the methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated. In addition, standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were applied to assess the intervention effect with respect to CRF and QoL. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager (version 5.4).ResultsThere were a total of 1573 participants in the 28 included articles. According to the meta-analysis, CRF (SMD = -0.35, 95% CI: -0.63 to -0.07, p = 0.01) and QoL (SMD = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.53, p < 0.01) were positively affected by exercise interventions. Subgroup analyses revealed considerable improvements in CRF (SMD = -0.54, 95% CI: -1.00 to -0.09, p = 0.02) and QoL (SMD = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.59, p < 0.01) from aerobic exercise. An intervention duration less than 12 weeks had a better effect on CRF (SMD = -0.80, 95% CI: -1.43 to -0.17, p = 0.01) and QoL (SMD = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.85, p < 0.01), and three times per week was the most effective frequency in improving QoL (SMD = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.28 to 1.11, p < 0.01). Exercise intervention was more successful in improving CRF (SMD = -0.66, 95% CI: -1.10 to -0.21, p < 0.01) and QoL (SMD=-0.50, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.78, p < 0.01) in female cancer patients. Sensitivity analyses showed that the pooled outcomes were reliable and stable.ConclusionExercise interventions are a workable approach to improve CRF and QoL among cancer patients. An aerobic exercise intervention of less than 12 weeks might be most effective in improving CRF and QoL, and three times per week might be the most appropriate frequency. Exercise might have a more positive effect on improving CRF and QoL in female cancer patients. Additionally, a larger number of high-quality RCTs should be conducted to further confirm the efficacy of exercise interventions on CRF and QoL among cancer patients.Registration numberCRD42022351137.

Dataset Information

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

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets