Effect sizes across studies show substantial heterogeneity, with wide prediction intervals spanning large negative to large positive true effects¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · 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 Q-statistic was significant and I-squared was 83.78% in the model with outliers, indicating most observed variance reflects true heterogeneity. → Ellinor Waaland 2026
q3 i? The 95% prediction interval ranged from -0.96 to 1.90, indicating future true effects could range from large negative to large positive. → Ellinor Waaland 2026
Evidence¶
Ellinor Waaland 2026¶
Ellinor Waaland, Vibeke Rønneberg, Dieuwer ten Braak. (2026). Effects and Characteristics of Mathematics Interventions for Students with Co-Occurring Difficulties in Mathematics and Reading: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10184-x
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2
Heterogeneity assessment in the CHE meta-analysis of 60 effect sizes nested in nine studies. The Q-test was significant; the article reports "The I-squared value of 83.78 indicates that 83.78% of the variance in observed effects between effect sizes within studies reflects true heterogeneity" and a prediction interval from -0.96 to 1.90.
"The Q-statistic for the test of heterogeneity in effect sizes across studies was significant (Q (59) = 1015.47, p < 0.001)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Effects of game-based learning in STEM education vary substantially across studies, with prediction intervals spanning trivial-to-negative through very strong effects — related
- The positive GenAI writing effect is robust across dependence-aware, sensitivity, and risk-of-bias specifications, but the wide prediction interval spans near-zero to large effects — related
- Effects of AI literacy interventions vary considerably across contexts, with most variance between studies (71.361%) and a wide prediction interval — related
- Feedback has a medium overall effect on student learning (d = 0.48 after outlier removal) with substantial heterogeneity — related
- Effect sizes vary widely between studies and especially between comparisons within studies — related
- Effect sizes across shared text reading studies show substantial true heterogeneity (I2 = 80.09) — related
- Effect sizes across included studies show high heterogeneity (all I² above 75%) — related
- Meta-analytic evidence on GenAI and critical thinking shows a positive mean association with a prediction interval spanning harm to benefit — related
- Mathematics interventions produce a positive overall mean effect on mathematical outcomes for students with co-occurring mathematics and reading difficulties compared to business-as-usual control — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
heterogeneity-math-interventions-co-occurring |
title |
Effect sizes across studies show substantial heterogeneity, with wide prediction intervals spanning large negative to large positive true effects |
description |
Effect sizes across studies show substantial heterogeneity, with wide prediction intervals spanning large negative to large positive true effects |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-22 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — ellinor-waaland-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.