Tier 2 interventions within the RtI-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis

This pre-registered systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to answer if K-2 students at risk (Population) for reading impairment benefited from a response to tier 2 reading intervention (Intervention) compared to teaching as usual, (Comparator), on word decoding outcomes (Outcome), based on rando...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Camilla Nilvius, Rickard Carlsson, Linda Fälth, Thomas Nordström
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Taylor & Francis Group 2021
Materias:	response to intervention (rti) reading intervention decoding tier 2 systematic review Education (General) L7-991
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/6f00a640828447df927ec5ff390cdfbe
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:6f00a640828447df927ec5ff390cdfbe
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:6f00a640828447df927ec5ff390cdfbe2021-11-26T11:19:50ZTier 2 interventions within the RtI-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis2331-186X10.1080/2331186X.2021.1994105https://doaj.org/article/6f00a640828447df927ec5ff390cdfbe2021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1994105https://doaj.org/toc/2331-186XThis pre-registered systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to answer if K-2 students at risk (Population) for reading impairment benefited from a response to tier 2 reading intervention (Intervention) compared to teaching as usual, (Comparator), on word decoding outcomes (Outcome), based on randomized controlled trials (Study type). Eligibility criteria were adequately sized (N > 30 per group) randomized controlled trials of tier 2 reading interventions within response to intervention targeting K-2 at risk students (percentile 40) compared with teaching as usual (TAU). Reading interventions had to be at least 20 sessions and conducted in a school setting with at least 30 students in each group and containing reading activities. Comparator could not be another intervention. Only decoding tests from Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised (WRMT) and Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) were included.Information sources: Database search was conducted 2019–05-20 in ERIC, PsycINFO, LLBA, WOS, and additionally in Google Scholar as well as a hand search in previous reviews and meta-analyses. The searches were updated on 2021–03-21. Risk of bias: Studies were assessed with Cochrane’s Risk of Bias 2, R-index and funnel plots. A random-effects model was used to analyze the effect sizes (Hedges’ g). Seven studies met the eligibility criteria but only four had sufficient data to extract for the meta-analysis. The weighted mean effect size across the four included studies was Hedges’ g = 0.31, 95% CI [0.12, 0.50] which means that the intervention group improved their decoding ability more than students receiving TAU. A Leave-one-out analysis showed that the weighted effect did not depend on a single study. Students at risk of reading difficulties benefit from tier 2 reading intervention conducted within response to intervention regarding a small effect on the students decoding ability. Only four studies met inclusion criteria and all studies had at least some risk of bias. tier 2 reading interventions, conducted in small groups within RtI, can to some extent support decoding development as a part of reading factors.Camilla NilviusRickard CarlssonLinda FälthThomas NordströmTaylor & Francis Grouparticleresponse to intervention (rti)reading interventiondecodingtier 2systematic reviewEducation (General)L7-991ENCogent Education, Vol 8, Iss 1 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	response to intervention (rti) reading intervention decoding tier 2 systematic review Education (General) L7-991
spellingShingle	response to intervention (rti) reading intervention decoding tier 2 systematic review Education (General) L7-991 Camilla Nilvius Rickard Carlsson Linda Fälth Thomas Nordström Tier 2 interventions within the RtI-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis
description	This pre-registered systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to answer if K-2 students at risk (Population) for reading impairment benefited from a response to tier 2 reading intervention (Intervention) compared to teaching as usual, (Comparator), on word decoding outcomes (Outcome), based on randomized controlled trials (Study type). Eligibility criteria were adequately sized (N > 30 per group) randomized controlled trials of tier 2 reading interventions within response to intervention targeting K-2 at risk students (percentile 40) compared with teaching as usual (TAU). Reading interventions had to be at least 20 sessions and conducted in a school setting with at least 30 students in each group and containing reading activities. Comparator could not be another intervention. Only decoding tests from Woodcock Reading Mastery Test-Revised (WRMT) and Test of Word Reading Efficiency (TOWRE) were included.Information sources: Database search was conducted 2019–05-20 in ERIC, PsycINFO, LLBA, WOS, and additionally in Google Scholar as well as a hand search in previous reviews and meta-analyses. The searches were updated on 2021–03-21. Risk of bias: Studies were assessed with Cochrane’s Risk of Bias 2, R-index and funnel plots. A random-effects model was used to analyze the effect sizes (Hedges’ g). Seven studies met the eligibility criteria but only four had sufficient data to extract for the meta-analysis. The weighted mean effect size across the four included studies was Hedges’ g = 0.31, 95% CI [0.12, 0.50] which means that the intervention group improved their decoding ability more than students receiving TAU. A Leave-one-out analysis showed that the weighted effect did not depend on a single study. Students at risk of reading difficulties benefit from tier 2 reading intervention conducted within response to intervention regarding a small effect on the students decoding ability. Only four studies met inclusion criteria and all studies had at least some risk of bias. tier 2 reading interventions, conducted in small groups within RtI, can to some extent support decoding development as a part of reading factors.
format	article
author	Camilla Nilvius Rickard Carlsson Linda Fälth Thomas Nordström
author_facet	Camilla Nilvius Rickard Carlsson Linda Fälth Thomas Nordström
author_sort	Camilla Nilvius
title	Tier 2 interventions within the RtI-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short	Tier 2 interventions within the RtI-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full	Tier 2 interventions within the RtI-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr	Tier 2 interventions within the RtI-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed	Tier 2 interventions within the RtI-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort	tier 2 interventions within the rti-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis
publisher	Taylor & Francis Group
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/6f00a640828447df927ec5ff390cdfbe
work_keys_str_mv	AT camillanilvius tier2interventionswithinthertimodelfordevelopingstudentsworddecodingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT rickardcarlsson tier2interventionswithinthertimodelfordevelopingstudentsworddecodingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT lindafalth tier2interventionswithinthertimodelfordevelopingstudentsworddecodingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT thomasnordstrom tier2interventionswithinthertimodelfordevelopingstudentsworddecodingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
_version_	1718409478493175808

Tier 2 interventions within the RtI-model for developing students’ word decoding – a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ejemplares similares