Claims

The response discusses limitations of the Philipsen et al. (2019) review and suggestions for future research

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r? · q1
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.

q1 i? The response article includes a discussion of the reviewed study's limitations and suggestions for future research. → An 2021

Evidence

An 2021

An, Y. (2021). A response to an article entitled “Improving teacher professional development for online and blended learning: a systematic meta-aggregative review”. Education Tech Research Dev, 69, 39–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09844-8

q1 · i? · review · r?

The abstract's closing sentence states that "Limitations of the study and suggestions for future research are also discussed." The specific limitations and suggestions are not printed in the provided preview text.

"Limitations of the study and suggestions for future research are also discussed."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id an-2021-discusses-limitations-and-future-research
title The response discusses limitations of the Philipsen et al. (2019) review and suggestions for future research
description The response discusses limitations of the Philipsen et al.
status review
evidence_strength weak
newest_evidence 2021
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-29
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — an-2021

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