Reading DisabilityNCT05692973
The Role of Knowledge Retrieval in Inference-making
A study testing Role of Knowledge Retrieval and Inference Intervention in people with Reading Disability and Reading Problem, run by William Jewell College at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This project will (a) examine the relationship between knowledge retrieval and inferencing; (b) determine the effectiveness of an intervention that improves knowledge retrieval and inferencing among struggling readers; and (c) expand research opportunities for undergraduates. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 8 to 14 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Reading Disability, Reading Problem
- What is being tested?
- Role of Knowledge Retrieval and Inference Intervention
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 316 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 31 May 2023to 31 Aug 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 8 to 14 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- performance below a a standard score of 93 on the Test of Silent Reading Efficiency
Who cannot join
- clinical diagnosis of a significant cognitive impairment
- clinical diagnosis of a significant behavioral disability
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
United States1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Excelsior Springs School District
Excelsior Springs, Missouri, 64024
Melissa Miller, Ph.D., 816-630-9200, mmiller@ga.essd40.com
Heather Gross, Ph.D., 816-630-9200, hgross@ga.essd40.com
About this study
Official title: The Role of Knowledge Retrieval in Inference-making Among Struggling Readers
This project will (a) examine the relationship between knowledge retrieval and inferencing; (b) determine the effectiveness of an intervention that improves knowledge retrieval and inferencing among struggling readers; and (c) expand research opportunities for undergraduates. The research design uses 316 struggling readers in grades 4-6 of diverse backgrounds. The effects of knowledge retrieval (accuracy and speed) on inferencing will be modeled without dichotomizing the distribution. Linear mixed effect models will be fit to determine whether reader characteristics make unique contributions to inferencing across the posttest and follow-up data collection time points. First, several structural models will be considered as students may be nested in teachers, schools, and tutors. Unconditional models will estimate the intraclass correlation for each level of the study design. If significant interclass correlations emerge, multilevel models will be fit to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention while controlling for covariates such as pre-test performance on inference-related measures and child-attributes such as English learner status. The primary analysis plan assumes an intent-to-treat model in which the efficacy of two intact conditions will be tested. Effect sizes will be estimated to report the magnitude of difference between the two conditions. Expected outcomes include (a) the identification of a method that effectively facilitates knowledge retrieval and the application of relevant knowledge to form inferences among elementary struggling readers from diverse backgrounds; (b) the validation of an intervention that teaches struggling readers how to activate, retrieve, and interweave relevant knowledge with information in the text and accurately form inferences while reading that can be broadly implemented in general education classrooms; and (c) expansion of undergraduate research opportunities, particularly among students from diverse backgrounds who have been historically underserved.
Read the detailed description
Theory and research suggest that inferencing serves as a critical aspect of comprehension and that inferencing fails when readers do not possess sufficient background knowledge or slowly retrieve and integrate knowledge from memory or text when reading. Research suggests that readers fluently retrieve and use knowledge that is well-connected to form inferences while reading. Further, inferencing among skilled comprehenders depends considerably on knowledge retrieval, thus implicating the important role knowledge plays in inferencing. Yet, very little research has examined how inferencing changes as a function of changes in knowledge. Understanding how inferencing adapts as a function of knowledge acquisition and knowledge use provides a necessary mechanism for refining how to improve this learning process, especially for older students with reading comprehension difficulties. This project fills this critical need. This project's goal is to determine if knowledge retrieval is a mechanism for improving inferencing among middle grade struggling readers attending rural schools. The central hypothesis is that knowledge is malleable, with fluent retrieval of relevant knowledge associated with improved inferencing. This hypothesis will be tested with the objective to evaluate knowledge retrieval methods and then test the effectiveness of an intervention that facilitates knowledge retrieval and inferencing among middle grade struggling readers attending rural schools. This proposal is scientifically important because it informs theory by determining whether fluent retrieval of relevant knowledge enables inferencing among struggling readers. It is practically important because it identifies the learning strategies struggling readers need to retrieve knowledge to make inferences. The rural context also becomes critically important here. Long-standing disparities in educational access exist for students of minority backgrounds, English-learners, and children at risk for learning disabilities who attend rural schools. However, fully powered randomized control trials rarely occur in rural settings and existing literature of studies in rural schools commonly contains methodological limitations. These gaps in the literature will be addressed through the following Aims.
Aim 1: Evaluate the relationship between knowledge retrieval and inferencing. This Aim will examine whether retrieval practice - a powerful and proven technique for enhancing knowledge retrieval, inferencing, and transfer among skilled adult readers - also improves knowledge retrieval and inferencing among rural, middle grade, struggling readers. Past research conducted in the middle grades shows that retrieval practice is associated with improved end-of-unit performance in content area classrooms. But no study has examined how, why, when, and for whom knowledge retrieval works and under what conditions for struggling readers. The primary hypothesis is that fluent retrieval of relevant knowledge facilitates inferencing. The expected outcome is the identification of a method that effectively facilitates knowledge retrieval and the application of relevant knowledge to form inferences among rural, middle grade, struggling readers.
Aim 2: Determine the effectiveness of an intervention that improves knowledge retrieval and inferencing. No intervention study has used knowledge retrieval techniques to help struggling readers retain new knowledge or retrieve and use relevant knowledge to form inferences while reading. The primary hypothesis is that changes in inferencing are associated with changes in knowledge retrieval; however, knowledge retrieval and inferencing must be explicitly taught and sufficiently practiced for inferencing to occur with the same regularity as skilled comprehenders use it. The expected outcome is the validation of an intervention that teaches rural, struggling middle grade readers how to activate, retrieve, and interweave relevant knowledge with information in the text to accurately form inferences while reading. Furthermore, very few reading intervention studies have occurred with middle grade struggling readers attending rural schools. The rural setting is important; existing practices do not consider the cumulative effects of rural poverty on general knowledge development and reading achievement or the long-term impact of limited access to academic support services. Additionally, only one inference intervention study has included English Learners. The English Learner population has increased substantially in rural communities, but past research shows that generalizing vocabulary and knowledge building interventions designed for monolinguals have not proven effective.
Aim 3. To expand undergraduate research opportunities by integrating undergraduate students on the research team with the knowledge and skills to successfully implement these randomized controlled trials.
- Conditions
- Reading Disability, Reading Problem
- Being tested
- Role of Knowledge Retrieval, Inference Intervention
- Keywords
- Inference-making, Knowledge retrieval, Reading comprehension
- Medical subject headings
- Dyslexia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Role of Knowledge RetrievalBehavioural
Students will learn a new knowledge base to perfect mastery. Following the attainment of mastery students will read passages on the topic and answer questions that prompt the literal recall of key facts and the formation of inferences.
Inference InterventionBehavioural
The intervention will pre-teach students a set of 20 essential facts about Egypt. Students will interact with expository and narrative texts. Students will practice using a text clue strategy to activate and integrate prior knowledge, will make in-text connections, connections across the 3 intervention texts, and connections between text and knowledge, and will make inferences about character motives and author intent. The tutor will ask students to justify connections and evaluate how these connections enhance understanding. Students will answer inference questions that require using text and background knowledge. A simple graphic organizer will support and scaffold inferencing. Throughout the intervention, students will practice retrieving the 20 essential facts about Egypt from memory using flash cards, completed in pairs with students providing each other feedback.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Variable Test | Experimental | Students will be taught a knowledge base comprised of 18 facts about Egypt. After learning the knowledge base to criterion, students will practice retrieving the knowledge base across four testing sessions spaced 24 hours apart. Students will receive different questions across testing sessions. Next, students will read 6 passages about Egypt and then answer literal and inferential questions about the passages. Immediately after reading the passages, students will get re-tested on their retention of the knowledge base and use of the knowledge base to form inferences. They will also get retested one week and one month later to examine students' long-term retention of the knowledge base and use to make inferences. Receives: Behavioral: Role of Knowledge Retrieval; Behavioral: Inference Intervention |
| Repeated Test | Experimental | Students will be taught a knowledge base comprised of 18 facts about Egypt. After learning the knowledge base to criterion, students will practice retrieving the knowledge base across four testing sessions spaced 24 hours apart. Students will receive the same questions repeated across testing sessions. Next, students will read 6 passages about Egypt and then answer literal and inferential questions about the passages. Immediately after reading the passages, students will get re-tested on their retention of the knowledge base and use of the knowledge base to form inferences. They will also get retested one week and one month later to examine students' long-term retention of the knowledge base and use to make inferences. Receives: Behavioral: Role of Knowledge Retrieval; Behavioral: Inference Intervention |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Students will be taught a knowledge base comprised of 18 facts about Egypt. After learning the knowledge base to criterion, students will re-read the passages. They will not receive any questions. Next, students will read 6 passages about Egypt and then answer literal and inferential questions about the passages. Immediately after reading the passages, students will get re-tested on their retention of the knowledge base and use of the knowledge base to form inferences. They will also get retested one week and one month later to examine students' long-term retention of the knowledge base and use to make inferences. Receives: Behavioral: Role of Knowledge Retrieval; Behavioral: Inference Intervention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Gates-MacGinite Reading Test-4th Edition; Change is being assessed
a standardized, group-administered, multiple-choice assessment of reading comprehension.
Measured: pre-intervention
Gates-MacGinite Reading Test-4th Edition; change is being assessed
a standardized, group-administered, multiple-choice assessment of reading comprehension
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Test of Language Competence-Expanded; Change is being assessed
Inference Task asks students to read three sentences and form an inference
Measured: pre-intervention
Test of Language Competence-Expanded; change is being assessed
Inference Task asks students to read three sentences and form an inference
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Bridge-IT; change is being assessed
asks students to read a five-sentence text, form an inference, and determine if the next sentence provided continues the story.
Measured: pre-intervention
Bridge-IT; change is being assessed
asks students to read a five-sentence text, form an inference, and determine if the next sentence provided continues the story.
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5; change is being assessed
Metalinguistics, Making Inferences subtest, an individually administered assessment, measures students' ability to make gap-filling inferences on the basis of causal relationships or event chains depicted in short narratives that are presented both orally and in print form.
Measured: pre-intervention
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5; change is being assessed
Metalinguistics, Making Inferences subtest, an individually administered assessment, measures students' ability to make gap-filling inferences on the basis of causal relationships or event chains depicted in short narratives that are presented both orally and in print form.
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Secondary outcomes (22)
Knowledge Retrieval; change is being assessed
It teaches new knowledge then measures the accuracy and efficiency by which the individual can retrieve that knowledge. After learning the knowledge base, students read passages and form inferences with the accuracy and efficiency of inferencing measured.
Measured: pre-intervention
Knowledge Retrieval; change is being assessed
It teaches new knowledge then measures the accuracy and efficiency by which the individual can retrieve that knowledge. After learning the knowledge base, students read passages and form inferences with the accuracy and efficiency of inferencing measured.
Measured: Immediately after the intervention
Knowledge Retrieval; change is being assessed
It teaches new knowledge then measures the accuracy and efficiency by which the individual can retrieve that knowledge. After learning the knowledge base, students read passages and form inferences with the accuracy and efficiency of inferencing measured.
Measured: one-week after the intervention
Knowledge Retrieval; change is being assessed
It teaches new knowledge then measures the accuracy and efficiency by which the individual can retrieve that knowledge. After learning the knowledge base, students read passages and form inferences with the accuracy and efficiency of inferencing measured.
Measured: one-month after the intervention
Test of Word Reading Efficiency-2; change is being assessed
Sight Word Efficiency, a 45-second assessment of students' word reading accuracy and speed and Phonemic Decoding Efficiency, a 45-second assessment of students' non-word reading accuracy and speed.
Measured: pre-intervention
Test of Word Reading Efficiency-2; change is being assessed
Sight Word Efficiency, a 45-second assessment of students' word reading accuracy and speed and Phonemic Decoding Efficiency, a 45-second assessment of students' non-word reading accuracy and speed.
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Metacognition survey; change is being assessed
asks students to report study strategies used when learning from text and includes questions about repeated studying and retrieval practice.
Measured: pre-intervention
Metacognition survey; change is being assessed
asks students to report study strategies used when learning from text and includes questions about repeated studying and retrieval practice.
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Contextualized Reading Strategy Survey; change is being assessed
49-item self-report survey designed to assess a collection of learning and comprehension strategies that students might use when reading for school.
Measured: pre-intervention
Contextualized Reading Strategy Survey; change is being assessed
49-item self-report survey designed to assess a collection of learning and comprehension strategies that students might use when reading for school.
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Working Memory Test Battery for Children
Word List Recall that asks the student to repeat a list of monosyllabic words, Non-word List Recall that asks the student to repeat a list of non-words and Listening Recall Test that requires that the student listen to a series of short sentences, judge their accuracy, and recall the final word of each sentence.
Measured: pre-intervention
Kauffman Brief Intelligence Test-2
Verbal Knowledge subtest, a norm-referenced, individually administered assessment of expressive word and world knowledge
Measured: pre-intervention
Gates-MacGinitie Vocabulary Test; change is being assessed
group administered test of receptive vocabulary
Measured: pre-intervention
Gates-MacGinitie Vocabulary Test; change is being assessed
group administered test of receptive vocabulary
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Egyptian Content Knowledge; change is being assessed
a researcher developed assessment of one's knowledge of Egypt
Measured: pre-intervention
Egyptian Content Knowledge; change is being assessed
a researcher developed assessment of one's knowledge of Egypt
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Test of Silent Reading Efficiency and Comprehension; change is being assessed
measure of silent reading fluency and understanding of text
Measured: pre-intervention
Test of Silent Reading Efficiency and Comprehension; change is being assessed
measure of silent reading fluency and understanding of text
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency; change is being assessed
measures of silent reading fluency and understanding of text
Measured: pre-intervention
Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency; change is being assessed
measures of silent reading fluency and understanding of text
Measured: immediately after the intervention
CBM-Maze Task; change is being assessed
measure of silent reading fluency and understanding of text
Measured: pre-intervention
CBM-Maze Task; change is being assessed
measure of silent reading fluency and understanding of text
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Jan 2023
- Study start31 May 2023
- Primary completion31 Aug 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Aug 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Reading DisabilityStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- In year 1 , Participants will be randomized to a variable test condition; repeated test condition; or a placebo condition to determine if the retrieval of knowledge through testing leads to improved inference making. In year 2, participants in the variable and repeated test conditions will receive a short intervention to determine if direct instruction in inferencing leads to improved inferencing and comprehension.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 316 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- William Jewell College
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Amy E Barth, Ph.D, Principal investigator, William Jewell College
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05692973
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2022-2026_aebarth
- Status last verified
- Jun 2023
- First submitted
- 2 Nov 2022
- Last updated
- 23 Jun 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: The following steps will be enacted: (a) requester will submit an email to the PI requesting data sharing; (b) A data-sharing agreement will be forwarded to the requester by the laboratory manager; (c) once the data-Sharing agreement is returned, a file will be prepared for the requester. This file will be prepared by PI or the laboratory manager; (d) files will be shared via secure data archive. Our data archives are secure and approved for use with Category I data.
Publications
Barth AE, Elleman A. Evaluating the Impact of a Multistrategy Inference Intervention for Middle-Grade Struggling Readers. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2017 Jan 1;48(1):31-41. doi: 10.1044/2016_LSHSS-16-0041.
PubMed 27776201Barth AE, Daniel J, Roberts G, Vaughn S, Barnes MA, Ankrum E, Kincaid H. The Role of Knowledge Availability in Forming Inferences with Rural Middle Grade English Learners. Learn Individ Differ. 2021 May;88:102006. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102006. Epub 2021 May 12.
PubMed 33994756
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Jun 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Role of Knowledge Retrieval in Inference-making Among Struggling Readers
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05692973
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2022-2026_aebarth
- Conditions
- Reading Disability, Reading Problem
- Keywords
- Inference-making, Knowledge retrieval, Reading comprehension
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 316 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- William Jewell CollegeUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 31 May 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Aug 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Aug 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 20 Jan 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This project will (a) examine the relationship between knowledge retrieval and inferencing; (b) determine the effectiveness of an intervention that improves knowledge retrieval and inferencing among struggling readers; and (c) expand research opportunities for undergraduates. The research design uses 316 struggling readers in grades 4-6 of diverse backgrounds. The effects of knowledge retrieval (accuracy and speed) on inferencing will be modeled without dichotomizing the distribution. Linear mixed effect models will be fit to determine whether reader characteristics make unique contributions to inferencing across the posttest and follow-up data collection time points. First, several structural models will be considered as students may be nested in teachers, schools, and tutors. Unconditional models will estimate the intraclass correlation for each level of the study design. If significant interclass correlations emerge, multilevel models will be fit to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention while controlling for covariates such as pre-test performance on inference-related measures and child-attributes such as English learner status. The primary analysis plan assumes an intent-to-treat model in which the efficacy of two intact conditions will be tested. Effect sizes will be estimated to report the magnitude of difference between the two conditions. Expected outcomes include (a) the identification of a method that effectively facilitates knowledge retrieval and the application of relevant knowledge to form inferences among elementary struggling readers from diverse backgrounds; (b) the validation of an intervention that teaches struggling readers how to activate, retrieve, and interweave relevant knowledge with information in the text and accurately form inferences while reading that can be broadly implemented in general education classrooms; and (c) expansion of undergraduate research opportunities, particularly among students from diverse backgrounds who have been historically underserved.
Detailed description
Theory and research suggest that inferencing serves as a critical aspect of comprehension and that inferencing fails when readers do not possess sufficient background knowledge or slowly retrieve and integrate knowledge from memory or text when reading. Research suggests that readers fluently retrieve and use knowledge that is well-connected to form inferences while reading. Further, inferencing among skilled comprehenders depends considerably on knowledge retrieval, thus implicating the important role knowledge plays in inferencing. Yet, very little research has examined how inferencing changes as a function of changes in knowledge. Understanding how inferencing adapts as a function of knowledge acquisition and knowledge use provides a necessary mechanism for refining how to improve this learning process, especially for older students with reading comprehension difficulties. This project fills this critical need. This project's goal is to determine if knowledge retrieval is a mechanism for improving inferencing among middle grade struggling readers attending rural schools. The central hypothesis is that knowledge is malleable, with fluent retrieval of relevant knowledge associated with improved inferencing. This hypothesis will be tested with the objective to evaluate knowledge retrieval methods and then test the effectiveness of an intervention that facilitates knowledge retrieval and inferencing among middle grade struggling readers attending rural schools. This proposal is scientifically important because it informs theory by determining whether fluent retrieval of relevant knowledge enables inferencing among struggling readers. It is practically important because it identifies the learning strategies struggling readers need to retrieve knowledge to make inferences. The rural context also becomes critically important here. Long-standing disparities in educational access exist for students of minority backgrounds, English-learners, and children at risk for learning disabilities who attend rural schools. However, fully powered randomized control trials rarely occur in rural settings and existing literature of studies in rural schools commonly contains methodological limitations. These gaps in the literature will be addressed through the following Aims.
Aim 1: Evaluate the relationship between knowledge retrieval and inferencing. This Aim will examine whether retrieval practice - a powerful and proven technique for enhancing knowledge retrieval, inferencing, and transfer among skilled adult readers - also improves knowledge retrieval and inferencing among rural, middle grade, struggling readers. Past research conducted in the middle grades shows that retrieval practice is associated with improved end-of-unit performance in content area classrooms. But no study has examined how, why, when, and for whom knowledge retrieval works and under what conditions for struggling readers. The primary hypothesis is that fluent retrieval of relevant knowledge facilitates inferencing. The expected outcome is the identification of a method that effectively facilitates knowledge retrieval and the application of relevant knowledge to form inferences among rural, middle grade, struggling readers.
Aim 2: Determine the effectiveness of an intervention that improves knowledge retrieval and inferencing. No intervention study has used knowledge retrieval techniques to help struggling readers retain new knowledge or retrieve and use relevant knowledge to form inferences while reading. The primary hypothesis is that changes in inferencing are associated with changes in knowledge retrieval; however, knowledge retrieval and inferencing must be explicitly taught and sufficiently practiced for inferencing to occur with the same regularity as skilled comprehenders use it. The expected outcome is the validation of an intervention that teaches rural, struggling middle grade readers how to activate, retrieve, and interweave relevant knowledge with information in the text to accurately form inferences while reading. Furthermore, very few reading intervention studies have occurred with middle grade struggling readers attending rural schools. The rural setting is important; existing practices do not consider the cumulative effects of rural poverty on general knowledge development and reading achievement or the long-term impact of limited access to academic support services. Additionally, only one inference intervention study has included English Learners. The English Learner population has increased substantially in rural communities, but past research shows that generalizing vocabulary and knowledge building interventions designed for monolinguals have not proven effective.
Aim 3. To expand undergraduate research opportunities by integrating undergraduate students on the research team with the knowledge and skills to successfully implement these randomized controlled trials.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- In year 1 , Participants will be randomized to a variable test condition; repeated test condition; or a placebo condition to determine if the retrieval of knowledge through testing leads to improved inference making. In year 2, participants in the variable and repeated test conditions will receive a short intervention to determine if direct instruction in inferencing leads to improved inferencing and comprehension.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Variable Test | Experimental | Behavioral: Role of Knowledge Retrieval, Behavioral: Inference InterventionStudents will be taught a knowledge base comprised of 18 facts about Egypt. After learning the knowledge base to criterion, students will practice retrieving the knowledge base across four testing sessions spaced 24 hours apart. Students will receive different questions across testing sessions. Next, students will read 6 passages about Egypt and then answer literal and inferential questions about the passages. Immediately after reading the passages, students will get re-tested on their retention of the knowledge base and use of the knowledge base to form inferences. They will also get retested one week and one month later to examine students' long-term retention of the knowledge base and use to make inferences. |
| Repeated Test | Experimental | Behavioral: Role of Knowledge Retrieval, Behavioral: Inference InterventionStudents will be taught a knowledge base comprised of 18 facts about Egypt. After learning the knowledge base to criterion, students will practice retrieving the knowledge base across four testing sessions spaced 24 hours apart. Students will receive the same questions repeated across testing sessions. Next, students will read 6 passages about Egypt and then answer literal and inferential questions about the passages. Immediately after reading the passages, students will get re-tested on their retention of the knowledge base and use of the knowledge base to form inferences. They will also get retested one week and one month later to examine students' long-term retention of the knowledge base and use to make inferences. |
| Placebo | Placebo comparator | Behavioral: Role of Knowledge Retrieval, Behavioral: Inference InterventionStudents will be taught a knowledge base comprised of 18 facts about Egypt. After learning the knowledge base to criterion, students will re-read the passages. They will not receive any questions. Next, students will read 6 passages about Egypt and then answer literal and inferential questions about the passages. Immediately after reading the passages, students will get re-tested on their retention of the knowledge base and use of the knowledge base to form inferences. They will also get retested one week and one month later to examine students' long-term retention of the knowledge base and use to make inferences. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 8 to 14 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- performance below a a standard score of 93 on the Test of Silent Reading Efficiency
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- clinical diagnosis of a significant cognitive impairment
- clinical diagnosis of a significant behavioral disability
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Role of Knowledge RetrievalStudents will learn a new knowledge base to perfect mastery. Following the attainment of mastery students will read passages on the topic and answer questions that prompt the literal recall of key facts and the formation of inferences. | Behavioural | Placebo, Repeated Test, Variable Test |
| Inference InterventionThe intervention will pre-teach students a set of 20 essential facts about Egypt. Students will interact with expository and narrative texts. Students will practice using a text clue strategy to activate and integrate prior knowledge, will make in-text connections, connections across the 3 intervention texts, and connections between text and knowledge, and will make inferences about character motives and author intent. The tutor will ask students to justify connections and evaluate how these connections enhance understanding. Students will answer inference questions that require using text and background knowledge. A simple graphic organizer will support and scaffold inferencing. Throughout the intervention, students will practice retrieving the 20 essential facts about Egypt from memory using flash cards, completed in pairs with students providing each other feedback. | Behavioural | Placebo, Repeated Test, Variable Test |
Primary outcome
Gates-MacGinite Reading Test-4th Edition; Change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
a standardized, group-administered, multiple-choice assessment of reading comprehension.
Gates-MacGinite Reading Test-4th Edition; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
a standardized, group-administered, multiple-choice assessment of reading comprehension
Test of Language Competence-Expanded; Change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Inference Task asks students to read three sentences and form an inference
Test of Language Competence-Expanded; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Inference Task asks students to read three sentences and form an inference
Bridge-IT; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
asks students to read a five-sentence text, form an inference, and determine if the next sentence provided continues the story.
Bridge-IT; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
asks students to read a five-sentence text, form an inference, and determine if the next sentence provided continues the story.
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Metalinguistics, Making Inferences subtest, an individually administered assessment, measures students' ability to make gap-filling inferences on the basis of causal relationships or event chains depicted in short narratives that are presented both orally and in print form.
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-5; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Metalinguistics, Making Inferences subtest, an individually administered assessment, measures students' ability to make gap-filling inferences on the basis of causal relationships or event chains depicted in short narratives that are presented both orally and in print form.
22 secondary outcomes
Knowledge Retrieval; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Knowledge Retrieval; change is being assessed
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention
Knowledge Retrieval; change is being assessed
Time frame: one-week after the intervention
Knowledge Retrieval; change is being assessed
Time frame: one-month after the intervention
Test of Word Reading Efficiency-2; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Test of Word Reading Efficiency-2; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Metacognition survey; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Metacognition survey; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Contextualized Reading Strategy Survey; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Contextualized Reading Strategy Survey; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Working Memory Test Battery for Children
Time frame: pre-intervention
Kauffman Brief Intelligence Test-2
Time frame: pre-intervention
Gates-MacGinitie Vocabulary Test; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Gates-MacGinitie Vocabulary Test; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Egyptian Content Knowledge; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Egyptian Content Knowledge; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Test of Silent Reading Efficiency and Comprehension; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Test of Silent Reading Efficiency and Comprehension; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
CBM-Maze Task; change is being assessed
Time frame: pre-intervention
CBM-Maze Task; change is being assessed
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Jun 2023.
- Background: PubMed 27776201Barth AE, Elleman A. Evaluating the Impact of a Multistrategy Inference Intervention for Middle-Grade Struggling Readers. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2017 Jan 1;48(1):31-41. doi: 10.1044/2016_LSHSS-16-0041.
- Background: PubMed 33994756Barth AE, Daniel J, Roberts G, Vaughn S, Barnes MA, Ankrum E, Kincaid H. The Role of Knowledge Availability in Forming Inferences with Rural Middle Grade English Learners. Learn Individ Differ. 2021 May;88:102006. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102006. Epub 2021 May 12.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. The following steps will be enacted: (a) requester will submit an email to the PI requesting data sharing; (b) A data-sharing agreement will be forwarded to the requester by the laboratory manager; (c) once the data-Sharing agreement is returned, a file will be prepared for the requester. This file will be prepared by PI or the laboratory manager; (d) files will be shared via secure data archive. Our data archives are secure and approved for use with Category I data.
Related trials for Reading Disability
Active, not recruiting
Pai.ACT: AI-Driven ACT Chatbot for Mental Health Triage and Service Evaluation
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Attention Deficit Disorder With Hyperactivity (ADHD)
Not yet recruiting
Immediate Effects of Active Prisms on Reading Automaticity and Motor Control in Young Adults With Developmental Dyslexia
Developmental Dyslexia
Active, not recruiting
Let's Know!2: Language-focused Intervention for Children at Risk of Comprehension Difficulties
Language Disorders in Children
Not yet recruiting
Brain Stimulation With Combined Reading and Motor Training for Children With Dyslexia
Developmental Dyslexia
Enrolling by invitation
Executive Function in Early Childhood
Reading Disability
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Amy E Barth, Ph.D principal investigator
William Jewell College
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Role of Knowledge Retrieval and Inference Intervention in people with Reading Disability and Reading Problem, run by William Jewell College at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Jun 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Andrea Meloan, BS (816-415-7831, meloana@william.jewell.edu), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Gates-MacGinite Reading Test-4th Edition; Change is being assessed (time frame: pre-intervention). The study lists 8 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05692973, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Jun 2023.