ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
A comparative analysis of traditional and technology-supported stepped teaching for clock and fraction reading skills in students with dyscalculia.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of technology-supported stepped teaching method in the acquisition of clock reading/telling and fraction reading/telling skills among students with mathematics learning difficulties. Six students from a special education school in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus participated in the study. A single-subject adapted alternating treatments design was employed, and baseline, instructional, daily probe, maintenance, and generalization sessions were conducted in a one-to-one instructional format. Clock and fraction instruction incorporated analog clocks, fraction models, illustrated cards, and a tablet-based AI application, and was structured according to the instructional steps of "do," "show," and "say". Student responses were systematically recorded, including correct, incorrect, and no responses, as well as the levels of verbal and physical prompting required. Maintenance and generalization sessions were conducted to assess the durability of acquired skills and their generalization across different materials, settings, and instructors. The findings indicated that both instructional approaches were effective in improving students' clock reading/telling and fraction reading/telling skills.
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.