Empirical evidence for protective factors in word-reading resilience is sparse and based on only a few studies¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · 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.
q2 i? Overall, empirical evidence for protective factors in word-reading resilience is sparse and at present rests on only a few studies. → Appels 2024
Evidence¶
Appels 2024¶
Appels, S., van Viersen, S., van Erp, S., Hornstra, L., & de Bree, E. (2024). A scoping review on word-reading resilience in literacy: Evaluating empirical evidence for protective factors. Learning and Instruction, 93, 101969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101969
q2 · i? · review · r2
The review's overall conclusion from its systematic search of empirical studies of compensation in literacy development among children with (a risk of) word-level RD: "empirical evidence for protective factors is sparse and at present based on only a few studies". No effect size is printed.
"Overall, empirical evidence for protective factors is sparse and at present based on only a few studies"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Study designs and statistical analyses in literacy resilience research are often insufficient to distinguish promotive, protective, and skill-enhancing factors — related
- Evidence for promotive and skill-enhancing factors in literacy resilience is underrecognized while the same evidence is overinterpreted towards protective effects — related
- Most studies of literacy resilience have (very) small sample sizes and low statistical power to find relevant effects — related
- Emerging reading and math resilience literatures suggest candidate resilience factors across cognitive, emotion/motivation, social/environmental, and neural levels, most not yet classified as promotive or protective — a broader claim this one bears on
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
protective-factor-evidence-sparse-word-reading |
title |
Empirical evidence for protective factors in word-reading resilience is sparse and based on only a few studies |
description |
Empirical evidence for protective factors in word-reading resilience is sparse and based on only a few studies |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-22 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — appels-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.