The pattern of SCD weaknesses is consistent across identification criteria, but criteria identify widely differing proportions of children¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r3 · q2–q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Cohort did not moderate the group–outcome relation: the cohort by group interaction was not statistically significant and explained no additional variance. → Spencer 2019 q2 i? Prior work shows identification criteria for SCD identify anywhere from 0.8% to 22% of children, a source of over- or under-identification. → Spencer 2019 (2)

Evidence¶

Spencer 2019¶

Spencer, M., Wagner, R. K., & Petscher, Y. (2019). The Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary Knowledge of Children with Poor Reading Comprehension despite Adequate Decoding: Evidence from a Regression-Based Matching Approach. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000274

q3 · i? · associational · r3

Multilevel moderation model for the SCD-2540 subsample reported in the Results section. The cohort × group interaction was non-significant (0.01, p = .09) with 0% explained variance; the SCD-540 interaction was likewise non-significant (0.04, p = .21).

"the cohort and group interaction was neither statistically significant (0.01, p = .09), nor did it explain additional variance at any of the clustering level (i.e., 0%)."

Spencer 2019 (2)¶

Spencer, M., Wagner, R. K., & Petscher, Y. (2019). The Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary Knowledge of Children with Poor Reading Comprehension despite Adequate Decoding: Evidence from a Regression-Based Matching Approach. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000274

q2 · i? · associational · r3

Introduction-level attribution to Ronberg and Petersen (2015), reported as background motivation. The article attributes the 0.8%–22% range to that review; the present study addresses this by comparing lenient (25th) and stringent (5th) percentile criteria.

"examined the influence of variable identification criteria for children with SCD and noted that different criteria identified anywhere from 0.8% to 22% of children."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Most children with SCD have vocabulary weaknesses, with intact vocabulary being rare — related
• The vocabulary weakness of children with SCD is best characterized as a developmental delay rather than a developmental deficit — related
• Children with specific reading comprehension difficulties show substantially poorer reading comprehension than vocabulary relative to typical readers — related
• Sample selection criteria moderate MLD effect sizes: stricter cutoffs, specificity, and age change group differences — related
• The XBA and C/DM PSW methods show chance-level agreement (kappa = -.10) in identifying LD among fourth graders with reading comprehension deficits — related