Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36091337›Full record

ArticleBehavior analysis in practice2023

An Experimental Comparison of In-Person and Remote Instruction for Preschoolers with Disabilities.

Joseph Peysin, Daniel Fienup, Stavra Romas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior analysis in practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Joseph PeysinTeachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY USA.
Daniel FienupTeachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0593-2929
Stavra RomasThe Fred S. Keller School, Yonkers, NY USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Remote instruction is becoming increasingly common, yet few studies have directly compared remote and in-person instruction in a controlled manner. We used a reversal design to compare the effects of in-person and remote instruction for six preschool participants with disabilities learning tacts and sight words. Distribution of instruction, methodology, and materials across in-person and remote conditions were equated so that the only difference across conditions was the modality of instruction. Across conditions, we measured (1) the rate of learning; (2) the rate of trial presentation; (3) number of targets mastered; and (4) percentage of correct responses during follow-up assessment. Results indicate that three of six participants reliably met acquisition criteria and completed instruction faster in-person, with mixed results for the other three participants. No consistent difference was observed in response maintenance or generalization across modalities. These findings add to existing literature suggesting that remote instruction should be considered in situations where in-person instruction is unavailable.

Indexed as

COVID-19in-person instructionremote instructiontelehealth

Identifiers

PMID36091337
PMCPMC9438875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.