Publication bias analyses suggest possible small-sample bias for SCED studies, with trim-and-fill reducing the adjusted mean effect to 1.01¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Eggers' regression did not indicate small sample bias for SCED studies, but visual inspection of the funnel plot suggested possible bias, and trim-and-fill reduced the adjusted mean effect to 1.01 (95% CI [−0.01–2.04], p = 0.05). → Dahl-Leonard 2025

Evidence¶

Dahl-Leonard 2025¶

Dahl-Leonard, K., Hall, C., Cho, E., Capin, P., Roberts, G. J., Kehoe, K. F., Haring, C., Peacott, D., & Demchak, A. (2025). Examining the Effects of Family-Implemented Literacy Interventions for School-Aged Children: A Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09985-3

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Publication bias analysis of the 10 SCED studies using a regular Egger's test and the trim-and-fill method. The adjusted effect after adding three imputed studies was "reduced to 1.01 (95% CI [−0.01–2.04], p = 0.05)". For group design studies, Eggers' regression found no significant intercept (p = 0.12) and the funnel plot showed no asymmetry.

"the visual inspection of the funnel plot indicated the possibility of small sample bias, and the adjusted mean effect after including three additional studies was reduced to 1.01 (95% CI [−0.01–2.04], p = 0.05) based on the trim-and-fill method."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The pooled effect of writing instruction for US ELL students is robust to sensitivity analyses but funnel plot asymmetry suggests possible missing positive effect sizes — related
• Egger's test suggests publication bias may be present, with the selection-model adjusted mean effect falling to 0.36 — related
• In SCED studies, family-implemented interventions significantly improve text reading outcomes (g = 1.80) but show a positive, non-significant effect on decoding/word reading outcomes (g = 0.86) — related
• The included scaffolding studies show small-study effects, which the Bayesian approach addresses by shrinking overweighted effect sizes — related
• Funnel-plot asymmetry suggests possible selection or publication bias, but p-curve analyses indicate evidential value for the pooled relationships — related