↓ Skip to main content

The Effects of Baseline Estimation on the Reliability, Validity, and Precision of CBM-R Growth Estimates

Overview of attention for article published in School Psychology Quarterly, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
The Effects of Baseline Estimation on the Reliability, Validity, and Precision of CBM-R Growth Estimates
Published in
School Psychology Quarterly, September 2013
DOI 10.1037/spq0000023
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This study examined the effect of baseline estimation on the quality of trend estimates derived from Curriculum Based Measurement of Oral Reading (CBM-R) progress monitoring data. The authors used a linear mixed effects regression (LMER) model to simulate progress monitoring data for schedules ranging from 6-20 weeks for datasets with high and low levels of residual variance (poor and good quality datasets respectively). Three observations per day for the first three days of data collection were generated for baseline estimation. As few as one and as many as nine observations were used to calculate baseline. The number of weeks of progress monitoring and the quality of the dataset were highly influential on the reliability, validity, and precision of simulated growth estimates. Results supported the use of using the median of three observations collected on the first day to estimate baseline, particularly when the first observation of that day systematically underestimated student performance. Collecting a large number of observations to estimate baseline does not appear to improve the quality of CBM-R growth estimates.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Researcher 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 47%
Social Sciences 6 20%
Arts and Humanities 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 5 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 November 2013.
All research outputs
#21,948,497
of 27,780,120 outputs
Outputs from School Psychology Quarterly
#146
of 154 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,812
of 217,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age from School Psychology Quarterly
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,780,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 154 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 217,702 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them