Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 273

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluating the Quality of Evidence from Correlational Research for Evidence-Based Practice

Open access
Thompson, Bruce, Diamond, Karen E., McWilliam, Robin, Snyder, Patricia, Snyder, Scott W.·2005·Exceptional Children

Abstract

Only true experiments offer definitive evidence for causal inferences, but not all educational interventions are readily amenable to experiments. Correlational evidence can at least tentatively inform evidence-based practice when sophisticated causal modeling or exclusion methods are employed. Correlational evidence is most informative when exemplary practices are followed as regards (a) measurement, (b) quantifying effects, (c) avoiding common analysis errors, and (d) using confidence intervals to portray the range of possible effects and the precisions of the effect estimates.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/001440290507100204

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Cited by

See all 273

Metadata

Authors
Thompson, B., Diamond, K. E., McWilliam, R., Snyder, P., & Snyder, S. W.
Venue
Exceptional Children
Published
2005-01
Volume
71
Issue
2
Pages
181-194
ISSN
  • 0014-4029 (ISSN-L)
  • 2163-5560
OpenAlex
W2138981714
Cited by
273
References
9
FWCI
55.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluating the Quality of Evidence from Correlational Research for Evidence-Based Practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/001440290507100204
The paper
Thompson, B., Diamond, K. E., McWilliam, R., Snyder, P., & Snyder, S. W. (2005). Evaluating the Quality of Evidence from Correlational Research for Evidence-Based Practice. Exceptional Children. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100204

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.