Examining How Treatment Fidelity Is Supported, Measured, and Reported in K-3 Reading Intervention Research

被引:36
作者
Capin, Philip [1 ]
Walker, Melodee A. [2 ]
Vaughn, Sharon [1 ]
Wanzek, Jeanne [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Austin, Meadows Ctr Preventing Educ Risk, 1912 Speedway,D4900,SZB 228, Austin, TX 78712 USA
[2] Boston Univ, Sch Educ, Boston, MA 02215 USA
[3] Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Special Educ, Nashville, TN 37235 USA
关键词
Treatment fidelity; Treatment integrity; Fidelity of implementation; Intervention fidelity; Intervention research; Reading intervention; SPECIAL-EDUCATION RESEARCH; CODE-ORIENTED INSTRUCTION; EARLY LITERACY SKILLS; TREATMENT INTEGRITY; AT-RISK; PREREADING INTERVENTION; PHONOLOGICAL AWARENESS; KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS; SPELLING INSTRUCTION; FLUENCY INTERVENTION;
D O I
10.1007/s10648-017-9429-z
中图分类号
G44 [教育心理学];
学科分类号
0402 ; 040202 ;
摘要
Treatment fidelity data (descriptive and statistical) are critical to interpreting and generalizing outcomes of intervention research. Despite recommendations for treatment fidelity reporting from funding agencies and researchers, past syntheses have found treatment fidelity is frequently unreported (e.g., Swanson, The Journal of Special Education, 47, 3-13, 2011) in educational interventions and fidelity data are seldom used to analyze its relation to student outcomes (O'Donnell, Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 33-84, 2008). The purpose of this synthesis was to examine how treatment fidelity is supported, measured, and reported in reading intervention studies conducted with students at risk or with reading difficulties in grades K-3 from 1995 through 2015. All studies (k = 175) were coded to extract and classify information related to (a) the characteristics of the intervention study (e.g., publication year, research design); (b) treatment implementer training and support; (c) treatment fidelity data collection procedures, dimensions (i.e., adherence, quality, receipt, dosage, and differentiation), and levels of treatment fidelity data; and (d) the use of fidelity scores in the analysis of treatment effects. Results indicated that less than half (47%) of the reading intervention studies synthesized reported treatment fidelity data (numeric or narrative). Exploratory analyses showed that several study features were associated with the prevalence of fidelity reporting. Studies reporting treatment fidelity largely measured treatment adherence, and scores were, on average, high. Other dimensions of treatment fidelity (e.g., treatment differentiation), and analyses relating fidelity data to outcomes, were consistently absent from the corpus of reading intervention studies reviewed. Recommendations for enhancing how treatment fidelity data in intervention studies are collected and reported are presented.
引用
收藏
页码:885 / 919
页数:35
相关论文
共 138 条
  • [1] Al Otaiba S., 2005, Exceptionality, P195, DOI [DOI 10.1207/S15327035EX1304_2, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327035ex1304_2]
  • [2] Who are the young children for whom best practices in reading are ineffective? An experimental and longitudinal study
    Al Otaiba, Stephanie
    Fuchs, Douglas
    [J]. JOURNAL OF LEARNING DISABILITIES, 2006, 39 (05) : 414 - 431
  • [3] To Wait in Tier 1 or Intervene Immediately: A Randomized Experiment Examining First-Grade Response to Intervention in Reading
    Al Otaiba, Stephanie
    Connor, Carol M.
    Folsom, Jessica S.
    Wanzek, Jeanne
    Greulich, Luana
    Schatschneider, Christopher
    Wagner, Richard K.
    [J]. EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN, 2014, 81 (01) : 11 - 27
  • [4] Alves K.D., 2015, Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, V13, P73
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2002, EXPT QUASIEXPERIMENT
  • [6] Randomized trials published in higher vs. lower impact journals differ in design, conduct, and analysis
    Bala, Malgorzata M.
    Akl, Elie A.
    Sun, Xin
    Bassler, Dirk
    Mertz, Dominik
    Mejza, Filip
    Vandvik, Per Olav
    Malaga, German
    Johnston, Bradley C.
    Dahm, Philipp
    Alonso-Coello, Pablo
    Diaz-Granados, Natalia
    Srinathan, Sadeesh K.
    Hassouneh, Basil
    Briel, Matthias
    Busse, Jason W.
    You, John J.
    Walter, Stephen D.
    Altman, Douglas G.
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 66 (03) : 286 - 295
  • [7] Enhancing treatment fidelity in health behavior change studies: Best practices and recommendations from the NIH behavior change consortium
    Bellg, AJ
    Borrelli, B
    Resnick, B
    Hecht, J
    Minicucci, DS
    Ory, M
    Ogedegbe, G
    Orwig, D
    Ernst, D
    Czajkowski, S
    [J]. HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY, 2004, 23 (05) : 443 - 451
  • [8] CONTROLLING THE FALSE DISCOVERY RATE - A PRACTICAL AND POWERFUL APPROACH TO MULTIPLE TESTING
    BENJAMINI, Y
    HOCHBERG, Y
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES B-STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY, 1995, 57 (01) : 289 - 300
  • [9] Comparison of three approaches to supplementary reading instruction for low-achieving second-grade readers
    Berninger, VW
    Vermeulen, K
    Abbott, RD
    McCutchen, D
    Cotton, S
    Cude, J
    Dorn, S
    Sharon, T
    [J]. LANGUAGE SPEECH AND HEARING SERVICES IN SCHOOLS, 2003, 34 (02) : 101 - 116
  • [10] Comparison of faster and slower responders to early intervention in reading: Differentiating features of their language profiles
    Berninger, VW
    Abbott, RD
    Vermeulen, K
    Ogier, S
    Brooksher, R
    Zook, D
    Lemos, Z
    [J]. LEARNING DISABILITY QUARTERLY, 2002, 25 (01) : 59 - 76