ArticleHeliyon2021
A meta-analysis of Geogebra software decade of assisted mathematics learning: what to learn and where to go?
Article in Heliyon, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring factors influencing student satisfaction in mathematics education using PLS-SEM and fuzzy sets FsQCA.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The effect of GeoGebra integrated instruction on students' learning of the quadratic function concept.F1000Research · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Today, hundreds of studies on mathematics learning have been found in various literature, supported by the use of GeoGebra software. This meta-analysis aims to determine the overall effect of using GeoGebra software and the extent to which study characteristics moderate the study effect sizes to consider the implications later. This study analyzed 36 effect sizes from 29 primary studies identified from ERIC documents, Sage Publishing, Google Scholar, and repositories from 2010 to 2020, and a total of 2111 students. In order to support calculation accuracy, a Comprehensive Meta-analysis (CMA) software was used. The effect size is determined using the Hedges equation, with an acceptable confidence level of 95%. It is known that the overall effect size of using GeoGebra software on the mathematical abilities of students is 0.96 based on the estimation of the random-effect model, and the standard error is 0.08. These findings indicate that, on average, students exposed to GeoGebra-based learning outperformed math abilities, which was initially equivalent to 82% of students in traditional classrooms. This study considers the five characteristics of the study. It showed that the GeoGebra software used was more effective in sample conditions less than or equal to 30. Providing classrooms with sufficient numbers of computers allowed students to use them individually, which was necessary to achieve a higher level of effectiveness. GeoGebra software is more effective when the treatment duration is set to less than or equal to four weeks. These findings help educators consider the characteristics of studies that moderate effect sizes using the GeoGebra software in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.