ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Exploring the Feasibility and Acceptability of a Brief Online Dialogic Book-Sharing Training for Teaching Support Staff.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. 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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesIn the UK, significant and rising numbers of children arrive in schools with marked deficits in key skills such as oral language. This rise has been further negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Given this, the foundation phase of primary school education is a necessary environment for targeting language deficits. There is evidence to suggest that teaching assistant (TA)-led interventions can be effective when adequate training and support are provided. This study explored the feasibility of providing a brief, online dialogic book-sharing training to TAs, and whether this training would be effective in upskilling TAs and enable them to improve the language outcomes of children aged 3-7 years in a school context.
methodsNorth Wales primary schools were invited to nominate TAs for the two half-day training sessions. Five schools responded, and eleven TA-child dyads participated. Data were collected on recruitment, training acceptability and baseline, and post-training measures from TAs and children (2-3 weeks after the final training session) and 4-6 weeks after the first follow-up. Measures of TA competence and behavior were collected, along with measures of child language and behavior.
resultsSchools and TAs were recruited; TAs reported positively to the training, and the results showed small to large effect size benefits on all TA skills and child expressive language with significant positive post-training effects on TAs' use of reflections and child language abilities. However, these effects were somewhat reduced at follow-up.
conclusionsOverall, the results of this feasibility study provide positive evidence for this training as an accessible way for schools to strengthen their prevention infrastructures by professionalizing a growing, but relatively untrained, group within the school workforce.
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.