Claims

ACCESS produces significantly greater improvement in use of study aids than delayed treatment among college students with ADHD

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2021 · 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 i1 The rate of change in use of study aids was significantly higher in the ACCESS group (d = .29), with the delayed condition showing no change. → Eddy et al. 2021

Evidence

Eddy et al. 2021

Laura D. Eddy, Arthur D. Anastopoulos, Melissa R. Dvorsky, Paul J. Silvia, Jeffrey D. Labban & Joshua M. Langberg (2021). An RCT of a CBT Intervention for Emerging Adults with ADHD Attending College: Functional Outcomes. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2020.1867989

q3 · i1 · causal · r2

Latent growth curve analysis of LASSI-2 Study Aids in the RCT: only the ACCESS condition increased significantly; the between-condition effect was small ("d = .29 [.04, .54]").

"the immediate ACCESS (b = 1.78, SE = .54, p = .001) condition increased significantly in use of study aids over time, but the DTC (b = .16, SE = .46, p = .733) condition did not change. The rate of change in use of study aids was significantly higher in the ACCESS group, Wald (1) = 6.28, p = .012, d = .29 [.04, .54]."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.