Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Ann Dyslexia. 2023 Jul;73(2):288-313. doi: 10.1007/s11881-023-00279-3. Epub 2023 Jan 26.
Early access to evidence-based reading intervention improves outcomes for students with or at risk for reading difficulties. Additionally, teacher implementation of reading interventions plays a key role in the efficacy of reading interventions. Previous research suggests the influence of intervention implementation fidelity on student language and literacy outcomes is more significant for lower-performing students and students with disabilities, such as dyslexia. However, recent syntheses have suggested that less than half of reading intervention studies report treatment fidelity data. This meta-analysis examined fidelity reporting within reading intervention studies for students with or at risk for dyslexia in Grades K-5. We aimed to record the frequency and extent of fidelity reporting, explore associations between study or intervention features and fidelity reporting, and compare mean intervention effect sizes for studies reporting fidelity and those that did not. A total of 51 studies were included. Results indicated that 75% of studies reported fidelity data. Studies reporting fidelity primarily focused on adherence and dosage data with little to no information reported for other dimensions of fidelity (i.e., quality, responsiveness, differentiation). Suggestions for improving reporting of treatment fidelity data are discussed.
早期获得基于证据的阅读干预可以改善有阅读困难或有阅读困难风险的学生的学习成果。此外，教师实施阅读干预在阅读干预的效果中起着关键作用。先前的研究表明，干预实施的保真度对语言和读写能力结果的影响对于表现较差的学生和有残疾的学生（如阅读障碍）更为显著。然而，最近的综合研究表明，不到一半的阅读干预研究报告了治疗保真度数据。本元分析检查了 K-5 年级有或有阅读障碍风险的学生的阅读干预研究中的保真度报告。我们旨在记录保真度报告的频率和程度，探索研究或干预特征与保真度报告之间的关联，并比较报告保真度和未报告保真度的研究的平均干预效果大小。共有 51 项研究被纳入。结果表明，75%的研究报告了保真度数据。报告保真度的数据的研究主要集中在依从性和剂量数据上，而对保真度的其他方面（即质量、响应性、差异化）几乎没有信息报告。讨论了提高治疗保真度数据报告的建议。
