Cited by 390Reading and Literacy DevelopmentLanguage Development and DisordersSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

Ameliorating Children’s Reading-Comprehension Difficulties: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Clarke, Paula J., Snowling, Margaret J., Truelove, Emma, Hulme, Charles·2010·Psychological Science

Abstract

Children with specific reading-comprehension difficulties can read accurately, but they have poor comprehension. In a randomized controlled trial, we examined the efficacy of three interventions designed to improve such children's reading comprehension: text-comprehension (TC) training, oral-language (OL) training, and TC and OL training combined (COM). Children were assessed preintervention, midintervention, postintervention, and at an 11-month follow-up. All intervention groups made significant improvements in reading comprehension relative to an untreated control group. Although these gains were maintained at follow-up in the TC and COM groups, the OL group made greater gains than the other groups did between the end of the intervention and follow-up. The OL and COM groups also demonstrated significant improvements in expressive vocabulary compared with the control group, and this was a mediator of the improved reading comprehension of the OL and COM groups. We conclude that specific reading-comprehension difficulties reflect (at least partly) underlying oral-language weaknesses that can be effectively ameliorated by suitable teaching.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0956797610375449

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The vocabulary lesson plans modeled on Clark et al. (2010) yielded significant improvements in knowledge of the taught vocabulary words in a randomized trial of children ages 8-9 years old with reading difficulties.

    “In a randomized trial of children ages 8–9 years old with reading difficulties, these lesson plans yielded significant improvements in knowledge of the taught vocabulary words (Clarke et al., 2010).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clarke, P. J., Snowling, M. J., Truelove, E., & Hulme, C.
Affiliations
University of York (GB)
Corresponding author
Hulme, Charles
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2010-06-28
Volume
21
Issue
8
Pages
1106-1116
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2147687450
Cited by
390
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 25
FWCI
38.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (ES/D005310/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
reading comprehension difficulties, expressive vocabulary, intervention efficacy, reading comprehension, children
MeSH terms
Child, Dyslexia, Education, Educational Status, Humans, Language Tests, Reading, Schools, Vocabulary, Comprehension

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