Background: Low levels of numeracy and literacy skills are associated with a range of negative outcomes later in life, such as reduced earnings and health. Obtaining information about effective interventions for children with or at risk of academic difficulties is therefore important.Objectives: The main objective was to assess the effectiveness of interventions targeting students with or at risk of academic difficulties in kindergarten to Grade 6.Search Methods: We searched electronic databases from 1980 to July 2018. We searched multiple international electronic databases (in total 15), seven national repositories, and performed a search of the grey literature using governmental sites, academic clearinghouses and repositories for reports and working papers, and trial registries (10 sources). We hand searched recent volumes of six journals and contacted international experts. Lastly, we used included studies and 23 previously published reviews for citation tracking.Selection Criteria: Studies had to meet the following criteria to be included:• Population: The population eligible for the review included students attending regular schools in kindergarten to Grade 6, who were having academic difficulties, or were at risk of such difficulties.• Intervention: We included interventions that sought to improve academic skills, were conducted in schools during the regular school year, and were targeted (selected or indicated).• Comparison: Included studies used an intervention-control group design or a comparison group design. We included randomised controlled trials (RCT); quasirandomised controlled trials (QRCT); and quasi-experimental studies (QES).• Outcomes: Included studies used standardised tests in reading or mathematics.

Background: Considering the rapid global movement towards inclusion for students with special educational needs (SEN), there is a surprising lack of pedagogical or didactic theories regarding the ways in which inclusive education may affect students with SEN. Group composition within the educational setting may play a role in determining the academic achievement, socio-emotional development, and wellbeing of students with SEN. Proponents of inclusion propose that segregated educational placement causes stigmatisation and social isolation which may have detrimental effects on the self-concept and self-confidence of students with SEN.On the other hand, opponents of inclusion for all special needs students suggest that placement in general education classrooms may have adverse effects especially if the time and resources allocated for individualisation are not aligned with student needs. Since the 1980s, a number of reviews on the effects of inclusion have been published. Results are inconsistent, and several reviews point to a number of methodological challenges and weaknesses of the study designs within primary studies. In sum, the impact of inclusion on students with SEN may be hypothesised to be both positive and negative, and the current knowledge base is inconsistent.Objectives: The objective was first:• To uncover and synthesise data from contemporary studies to assess the effects of inclusion on measures of academic achievement, socio-emotional development, and wellbeing of children with special needs when compared to children with special needs who receive special education in a segregated setting.• A secondary objective was to explore how potential moderators (gender, age, type and severity of special need, part or full time inclusive education, and co-teaching) relate to outcomes.

No abstract

This is the protocol for a Campbell review. The objectives are as follows: To assess the efficacy of attachment‐based interventions on measures of favourable parent/child outcomes (attachment security, dyadic interaction, parent/child psychosocial adjustment, behavioural and mental health problems and placement breakdown) within foster and adoptive families with children aged between 0 and 17 years. To identify factors that appear to be associated with more effective outcomes and factors that modify intervention effectiveness (for example, age of the child at placement and at intervention start, programme duration, programme focus)

The Partners for Change Outcome System (PCOMS) is a feedback system that has been developed as part of psychotherapeutic treatment. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of the PCOMS. We searched the literature and included studies that used a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. We calculated a combined effect size across studies for outcomes related to the number of sessions attended. We also calculated a combined effect size for outcomes related to the participants’ well-being. However, in the analysis of the effect on well-being, we excluded studies that included only the Outcome Rating Scale as a measure of effect because this scale is part of the PCOMS. In the calculation of the combined effect size, we used random effect models with inverse weighted variance. In the systematic literature search we identified 14 RCT studies that evaluated the effect of the PCOMS. Based on 12 studies, we found a rather small effect size for the number of sessions attended favoring the PCOMS intervention (Hedges’s g = 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI: 0.001, 0.26]). The effect size corresponded to a difference of less than 1 session. Six studies included a well-being scale that was independent of the PCOMS intervention as the outcome. The effect size for the 6 studies was insignificant (Hedges’s g = 0.03; 95% Cl [−0.18, 0.23]). We found no evidence that the PCOMS feedback system has an effect on the number of sessions attended by clients or that the PCOMS improves the well-being of clients.