Learning deficits are appreciably larger in middle-income countries than in high-income countries, with no evidence available from low-income countries¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2028: baselines and conditions change
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 mean difference in deficits between middle-income and high-income countries is δ = −0.29 (P = 0.008), with the three largest estimates in the sample coming from middle-income countries. → Bastian A. Betthäuser 2023
Evidence¶
Bastian A. Betthäuser 2023¶
Bastian A. Betthäuser, Anders M. Bach-Mortensen & Per Engzell. (2023). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence on learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nature Human Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01506-4
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Bivariate comparison grouping estimates from Brazil, Colombia, Mexico and South Africa against high-income countries (Fig. 6c; medians high −0.12, middle −0.37). The printed mean difference "δ = −0.29" is statistically significant (P = 0.008); no study from a low-income country met the inclusion criteria.
"The learning deficit is appreciably larger in middle-income countries than in high-income countries (mean difference δ = −0.29, t(41) = −2.78, two-tailed P = 0.008, 95% CI −0.50 to −0.08). In fact, the three largest estimates of learning deficits in our sample are from middle-income countries"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The evidence base on COVID-19 learning is geographically skewed toward high-income countries and about half of studies carry serious or critical risk of bias, with no evidence of publication bias — related
- School-aged children experienced a substantial overall learning deficit during the COVID-19 pandemic (pooled d = −0.14), equivalent to about 35% of a school year's learning — a broader claim this one bears on
- Virtual patient effectiveness evidence comes from both high-income and low- and middle-income countries — related
- Global inclusion gaps persist despite large EdTech investment — related
- No evidence that COVID-19 learning deficits differ between primary and secondary students — related
- COVID-19 learning deficits arose early in the pandemic and have neither closed nor substantially widened since then — related
- Learning deficits during the pandemic are larger in maths than in reading — related
- Technology access problems during the COVID shift were more prevalent among minoritized students and students from lower-income households — related
- Estimated Covid-19 learning deficits are more pronounced in studies using experimental/quasi-experimental designs than in descriptive or correlational studies — related
- Estimated learning deficits are smaller in European studies than in studies from the rest of the world — related
- Concept-mapping effects are larger in low- and middle-income countries (g = 1.053) than high-income countries (g = 0.626) — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
covid-deficits-larger-middle-income-countries |
title |
Learning deficits are appreciably larger in middle-income countries than in high-income countries, with no evidence available from low-income countries |
description |
Learning deficits are appreciably larger in middle-income countries than in high-income countries, with no evidence available from low-income countries |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2023 |
recheck_by |
2028 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — bastian-a-betthäuser-2023 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.