A pre-registered systematic review identified 41 mathematical assessments and 25 screeners evaluated for psychometric properties in children aged 0–8 years¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? The review identified 41 mathematical assessments and 25 screeners for measuring early mathematical skills. → Laura A. Outhwaite 2024
Evidence¶
Laura A. Outhwaite 2024¶
Laura A. Outhwaite, Pirjo Aunio, Jaimie Ka Yu Leung, Jo Van Herwegen. (2024). Measuring Mathematical Skills in Early Childhood: a Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Early Maths Assessments and Screeners. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09950-6
q3 · i? · review · r3
Pre-registered systematic review (PRISMA protocol) searching seven scholarly databases and two grey literature sources, with backward, updated and forward citation searches; 89 studies were included in the synthesis. The review reports "41 mathematical assessments and 25 screeners were identified".
"Overall, 41 mathematical assessments and 25 screeners were identified."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Only four screeners demonstrated acceptable diagnostic accuracy for distinguishing children with or at-risk of mathematical learning difficulties — related
- Content validity evidence was reported for only eight assessments and four screeners, and over half of tools were developed in WEIRD societies or in English — related
- Only one mathematical assessment and one screener (NSS) met the acceptability threshold for predictive validity — related
- Concurrent validity evidence is sparse: only 11 assessments and one screener aligned with other validated measurement tools — related
- Only 15 of the identified measurement tools met common acceptability thresholds for more than two areas of psychometric evidence — related
- Most early maths measurement tools target number and arithmetic skills, with less than half covering shape, space, and measure — related
- Most identified early maths measurement tools are child-direct measures administered individually with a trained assessor in paper-based format — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
66-early-maths-tools-identified-systematic-review |
title |
A pre-registered systematic review identified 41 mathematical assessments and 25 screeners evaluated for psychometric properties in children aged 0–8 years |
description |
A pre-registered systematic review identified 41 mathematical assessments and 25 screeners evaluated for psychometric properties in children aged 0–8 years |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — laura-a-outhwaite-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.