ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Evaluation of an Online Version of the CFT 20-R in Third and Fourth Grade Children.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is growing demand for digital intelligence testing. In the current study, we evaluated the validity of an online version of the revised German Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFT 20-R). A total of 4100 children from the third and fourth grades completed the online version using a smartphone or tablet. Subsequently, 220 of these children also completed the paper-pencil (PP) version. The internal consistency and construct validity of the online version appeared to be acceptable. The correlation between the raw scores and school grades in German and mathematics was slightly lower than expected. On average, the raw scores for the PP version were revealed to be higher, which was probably due to a learning effect. At the item level, the results show small differences for the subtests Series and Matrices, possibly caused by small differences in the presentation of the items. The correspondence between the versions did not depend on children's levels of impulsivity or intelligence. Altogether, the results support the hypothesis that the online version of the CFT 20-R is a valid measure of general fluid intelligence and highlight the need for separate norms.
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.