ArticleInternational journal of developmental disabilities2019
A comparison of sampling approaches for monitoring schoolwide inclusion program fidelity.
Article in International journal of developmental disabilities, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Including students with disabilities requires schoolwide interventions that are implemented with fidelity (adherence). Collection of fidelity data may become problematic when multiple evidence-based treatments exist in one setting. To address concerns around efficiency of data collection, this study hypothesized that the three sampling approaches (proportional, consensus, stratified random) provided similar levels of agreement with an expert rater, thus warranting the differentiation in their applications based on the needs of the evaluators. Three high schools were randomly assigned to one of three sampling approaches (i.e. proportional, consensus, stratified random) to complete a fidelity measure for the implementation of a schoolwide inclusion approach. Based on the Median Test, each sampling approach did not differ significantly from the scores of an expert rater. The results indicate that schools may have some choice in the methods they use to sample their staff around the measurement of fidelity of implementation.
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.