Planned moderator subgroup analyses could not be conducted because fewer than 10 studies per subgroup were available¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? For general internalising problems, anxiety, and depression, none of the eight planned moderator subgroup analyses could be run reliably because there were fewer than 10 studies per subgroup; narrative synthesis was substituted. → Francis 2019

Evidence¶

Francis 2019¶

Francis, D. A.; Caruana, N.; Hudson, J. L.; McArthur, G. M. (2019). The association between poor reading and internalising problems: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2018.09.002

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Subgroup-analysis stage of the meta-analysis (Results, §3.5.2). The authors report that "there were fewer than 10 studies per subgroup" for each potential moderator, so a narrative synthesis of moderator evidence was provided in the Discussion instead.

"We could not conduct any of the planned subgroup analyses because there were fewer than 10 studies per subgroup, precluding any reliable comparison of effect sizes between subgroups for each potential moderator."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Effects of inclusion are heterogeneous and single-factor subgroup moderator analyses were inconclusive
• Too few studies exist to draw robust conclusions on moderating factors (age, gender, screen size, dosage, SAMR-based activities) or on whether benefits persist beyond the post-test
• Heterogeneity between studies of the metacognition–math association is significant and remains high in all moderator analyses
• Poor readers show moderately elevated anxiety compared to typical readers (d = 0.41) — related
• Poor readers show moderately elevated general internalising problems compared to typical readers (d = 0.41) — related
• Poor readers show a small but significant elevation in depression compared to typical readers (d = 0.23) — related