Claims

Matched control children with similar post-test scores outperform matched treatment children at follow-up

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · 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? In the matched sample, both groups performed identically at post-test, and the matched control group significantly outperformed the matched treatment group at follow-up (p < .001). → Bailey 2015

Evidence

Bailey 2015

Bailey, D. H., Nguyen, T., Jenkins, J. M., Domina, T., Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., Wolfe, C. B., & Spitler, M. E. (2015). Fadeout in an Early Mathematics Intervention: Same Old Schools or Underlying Skills? SREE Spring 2015 Conference. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED562173

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Matched-sample analysis comparing treatment children to a control subset with similar post-test REMA scores. The article reports the matched control group "significantly outperformed the matched treatment group at the follow-up assessment (p < .001)", a pattern consistent with the underlying skills model.

"In the matched sample, children in both groups performed identically at the post-test assessment, and the matched control group significantly outperformed the matched treatment group at the follow-up assessment (p < .001; Figure 3)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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