Claims

Secondary outcomes (sentence completion and passage comprehension subscales) showed no significant effects for either intervention

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2014 · 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 i0 On the NGRT subscales, sentence completion effect sizes were -0.18 (Chatterbooks) and 0.00 (Chatterbooks Plus), and passage comprehension effect sizes were -0.10 and -0.03, all non-significant. → Styles 2014

Evidence

Styles 2014

Styles, B., Clarkson, R., & Fowler, K. (2014). Chatterbooks: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary. Education Endowment Foundation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED581155

q3 · i0 · causal · r2

Secondary outcome analysis of the two NGRT subscales at second follow-up, modelled with pre-test score as covariate in the same repeated-measures framework as the primary outcome. All four effect sizes had confidence intervals passing through zero.

"Secondary Sentence completion score -0.18 ( -0.37, 0.01) 0.00 ( -0.19, 0.20) 159 150 145 Secondary Passage comprehension score -0.10 ( -0.28, 0.09) -0.03 ( -0.22, 0.16) 157 148 144"

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.