Posts Tagged Effect-size

[Webcast] KTDRR Research Evidence Training: An Overview of Meta-Analysis and Effect Size


Time: 3:00 – 4:00 p.m. Eastern
Time zone converter
(no charge)

About the Webcast

The KTDRR Center and the international Campbell Collaboration are working together to offer a five-part training course that focuses on high-quality methods for synthesis of evidence, including the procedures and methods for conducting systematic reviews/research syntheses as well as software, tools, and strategies for analyzing and reporting data. The training materials are developed by representatives of the Campbell Collaboration. Online resources from various national and international organizations will be provided for each session.

This fifth and final webcast in the series is a pre-recorded session that provides an overview of the foundation of meta-analysis: an effect size (a quantitative indicator of a treatment effect or relation between two variables) and discusses the basic processes of a meta-analysis and how the technique can be used to answer complex questions asked by policymakers and practitioners. (NOTE: This session was previously aired live on September 20, 2018.)

How to Participate

  1. On Wednesday, June 19, 2019 at 3 p.m. Eastern this pre-recorded webcast will be aired via YouTube. Detailed instructions will be provided to all who register.
  2. Tips for Optimal Viewing on YouTube:
    • To increase volume, turn up the volume on your computer and use the volume bar on bottom left side of the YouTube video window.
    • Captioning is available by selecting the “CC” option on the bottom right side of the video window. Click on “Options” to change the font, size, and color of the captions.
    • Additional tools on the bottom right side: “Settings” increase the video quality; “Theater mode” (default)/”Full screen.”
  3. Presentation materials: Coming soon!
  4. Evaluation: Please fill out the brief evaluation after viewing the webcast. Once the webcast is completed, all who register will receive an email with a link to the evaluation. There are no pre-approved CRC-CEUs for this webcast.

About the Presenters

Photo of Ryan Williams

Ryan Williams, PhD, is a principal researcher at AIR and leads large-scale evaluations and research syntheses. Dr. Williams’ work focuses on improving generalizations in education research through research synthesis. He is currently the Principal Investigator (PI) on an Institute for Educational Sciences (IES) meta-analysis that is exploring sources of heterogeneity in mathematics intervention effects. He also is a co-PI of an IES methods training institute for advanced meta-analysis. Dr. Williams is Associate Methods Editor of The Campbell Collaboration Education Coordinating Group.


Photo of Joshua Polanin

Joshua Polanin, PhD, is a principal researcher at AIR who has experience in the application and use of quantitative methodology in criminal justice, education, and behavioral health. He is the PI of two National Institute of Justice–funded systematic reviews and meta-analyses and the co-PI of one IES-funded systematic review and meta-analysis. In addition, he currently serves as the project director for the What Works Clearinghouse’s Statistics, Website, and Training (SWAT) contract and is co-PI of an IES methods training institute for advanced meta-analysis. Dr. Polanin is also active in The Campbell Collaboration and served as an Associate Editor of the Methods Group.

via KTDRR Research Evidence Training: An Overview of Meta-Analysis and Effect Size

, , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] The effectiveness of somatosensory retraining for improving sensory function in the arm following stroke: a systematic review

The aim of this study was to evaluate if somatosensory retraining programmes assist people to improve somatosensory discrimination skills and arm functioning after stroke.

Nine databases were systematically searched: Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsychInfo, Embase, Amed, Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, OT seeker, and Cochrane Library.

Studies were included for review if they involved (1) adult participants who had somatosensory impairment in the arm after stroke, (2) a programme targeted at retraining somatosensation, (3) a primary measure of somatosensory discrimination skills in the arm, and (4) an intervention study design (e.g. randomized or non-randomized control designs).

A total of 6779 articles were screened. Five group trials and five single case experimental designs were included (N = 199 stroke survivors). Six studies focused exclusively on retraining somatosensation and four studies focused on somatosensation and motor retraining. Standardized somatosensory measures were typically used for tactile, proprioception, and haptic object recognition modalities. Sensory intervention effect sizes ranged from 0.3 to 2.2, with an average effect size of 0.85 across somatosensory modalities. A majority of effect sizes for proprioception and tactile somatosensory domains were greater than 0.5, and all but one of the intervention effect sizes were larger than the control effect sizes, at least as point estimates. Six studies measured motor and/or functional arm outcomes (n = 89 participants), with narrative analysis suggesting a trend towards improvement in arm use after somatosensory retraining.

Somatosensory retraining may assist people to regain somatosensory discrimination skills in the arm after stroke.

via The effectiveness of somatosensory retraining for improving sensory function in the arm following stroke: a systematic review – Megan L Turville, Liana S Cahill, Thomas A Matyas, Jannette M Blennerhassett, Leeanne M Carey, 2019

, , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Effects of tDCS on motor learning and memory formation: a consensus and critical position paper – Clinical Neurophysiology


  • We review investigations of whether tDCS can facilitate motor skill learning and adaptation.
  • We identify several caveats in the existing literature and propose solutions for addressing these.
  • Open Science efforts will improve standardization, reproducibility and quality of future research.


Motor skills are required for activities of daily living. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied in association with motor skill learning has been investigated as a tool for enhancing training effects in health and disease. Here, we review the published literature investigating whether tDCS can facilitate the acquisition, retention or adaptation of motor skills. Work in multiple laboratories is underway to develop a mechanistic understanding of tDCS effects on different forms of learning and to optimize stimulation protocols. Efforts are required to improve reproducibility and standardization. Overall, reproducibility remains to be fully tested, effect sizes with present techniques vary over a wide range, and the basis of observed inter-individual variability in tDCS effects is incompletely understood. It is recommended that future studies explicitly state in the Methods the exploratory (hypothesis-generating) or hypothesis-driven (confirmatory) nature of the experimental designs. General research practices could be improved with prospective pre-registration of hypothesis-based investigations, more emphasis on the detailed description of methods (including all pertinent details to enable future modeling of induced current and experimental replication), and use of post-publication open data repositories. A checklist is proposed for reporting tDCS investigations in a way that can improve efforts to assess reproducibility.

Source: Effects of tDCS on motor learning and memory formation: a consensus and critical position paper – Clinical Neurophysiology

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: