Abstract
Meta-analysis methodology has evolved with the development of more robust statistical techniques; however, few reviews in special education have focused specifically on methodological rigor in meta-analyses. In this study, we examined 29 meta-analyses of mathematics interventions published from 2000 to 2022 to determine the extent to which researchers have applied four best practices in meta-analyses focused on mathematics interventions for students with disabilities. Our findings were (a) studies used three primary moderator techniques: meta-regression (k = 10), subgroup analysis (k = 8), analysis of variance (k = 3), and both subgroup analysis and meta-regression (k = 1); (b) only one study considered small sample corrections for hypothesis tests; (c) few researchers handled the dependence between multiple effect sizes (k = 3); and (d) the funnel plot was commonly used to detect publication bias (k = 8). Based on our findings, we make recommendations for methodological considerations for future meta-analyses.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Park, S., Lee, Y. R., Nelson, G., & Tipton, E. (2024, November 1). Four Best Practices for Meta-Analysis: A Systematic Review of Methodological Rigor in Mathematics Interventions for Students With or at Risk of Disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly. SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487231185133
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.