Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37720641›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023

Development of reading fluency and metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies during reciprocal teaching: do these changes actually contribute to reading comprehension?

Maris Juhkam, Anna-Liisa Jõgi, Piret Soodla, Mikko Aro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

4 authors.

Maris JuhkamTallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia.
Anna-Liisa JõgiTallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia.
Piret SoodlaTallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia.
Mikko AroUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study examined the effect of reciprocal teaching on students' reading comprehension, reading fluency, and metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies, especially among students with learning difficulties. The special focus was to assess how the increase in reading fluency and metacognitive knowledge during the intervention contributes to the reading comprehension outcome. The sample consisted of 301 Grade 3 students, of whom 77 had learning difficulties. Analyzes of (co)variances were used for estimating the effects of reciprocal teaching on the development of reading comprehension, reading fluency, and metacognitive knowledge. Multigroup path analysis was used for testing the effect of increase in reading fluency and metacognitive knowledge on reading comprehension. We found reciprocal teaching had a positive effect on reading comprehension, especially for students with learning difficulties. Reading fluency and metacognitive knowledge improved significantly, but similarly in both the intervention and control groups. However, the increase in metacognitive knowledge only contributed to reading comprehension in the intervention group, not in the control group. The study sheds light on the cognitive and metacognitive mechanisms underlying students' reading comprehension process, emphasizing metacognitive knowledge and especially the systematic practice of reading strategies as key factors in improving reading comprehension.

Indexed as

learning difficultiesreading comprehensionreading fluencyreading strategiesreciprocal teaching

Identifiers

PMID37720641
PMCPMC10502224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.