Peer-reviewed research
Effectiveness of Treatment Approaches for Children and Adolescents with Reading Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Katharina Galuschka et al., PLoS ONE, 2014 · DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0089900
Read the originalRead on October 16, 2026
- What it is
- A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of reading treatments for children and adolescents with reading disabilities. It pooled 49 comparisons of experimental and control groups across many treatment approaches, including phonics, reading fluency, phonemic awareness and reading comprehension training.
- How much weight it carries
- Peer-reviewed, open access, and built on randomized controlled trials. It pools trials of different designs and quality, and its authors call for more blinded trials. A null result for an approach means its effect was not statistically confirmed in the pooled set, not that the approach does not work.
Facts taken from this source
- The 2014 meta-analysis of reading treatments for children and adolescents included 49 comparisons of experimental and control groups from randomized controlled trials.
“randomized controlled trials with a total of 49 comparisons of experimental and control groups could be included” (Abstract)
- In a 2014 meta-analysis of randomized trials, phonics instruction was the only treatment approach whose effect on reading and spelling in children and adolescents with reading disabilities was statistically confirmed.
“phonics instruction is not only the most frequently investigated treatment approach, but also the only approach whose efficacy on reading and spelling performance in children and adolescents with reading disabilities is statistically confirmed” (Abstract)