Risk of bias did not significantly affect effect sizes in the intervention studies, though six of ten had moderate and four serious overall bias¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q3
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.
q3 i? Effect sizes were not significantly larger for studies with low risk of bias compared to medium or high risk (estimated effect 0.20, p = 0.171). → Smits-van der Nat 2024
Evidence¶
Smits-van der Nat 2024¶
Smits-van der Nat, M., van der Wilt, F., Meeter, M., & van der Veen, C. (2024). The Value of Pretend Play for Social Competence in Early Childhood: A Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09884-z
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Separate meta-regression of the ten intervention studies with ROBINS-I risk of bias as predictor. Serious bias in four studies stemmed mainly from outcome measurement by teachers aware of the intervention; no effect size was printed for this moderator contrast.
"No effect was found for risk of bias: Effect sizes were not significantly larger for studies with a low risk compared to studies with a medium or high risk (estimated effect 0.20; p = 0.171)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Comprehension-test expectancy tended to be more effective than delayed-keywords listing and rereading, though interventions did not substantially differ overall — related
- Five of seven situation-model interventions significantly improved relative metacomprehension accuracy, concept mapping only marginally (p = .097), and self-explaining not significantly — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
risk-of-bias-limited-impact-intervention-studies |
title |
Risk of bias did not significantly affect effect sizes in the intervention studies, though six of ten had moderate and four serious overall bias |
description |
Risk of bias did not significantly affect effect sizes in the intervention studies, though six of ten had moderate and four serious overall bias |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-22 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — smits-van-der-nat-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.