A systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the 'Fast ForWord' language intervention program
Strong GK, Torgerson CJ, Torgerson D, Hulme C · 2011
grade Bmeta-analysisindependentreplicated
Sample
6 studies meeting inclusion criteria (RCTs or matched-group comparisons with baseline equivalence)
Population
Children with oral language and reading difficulties
Design
PRISMA-reported systematic review with pre-established inclusion criteria and an unrestricted publication-date search, comparing Fast ForWord against both active and untreated controls. Fast ForWord is the archetype of a commercial programme built on a specific neuroscientific mechanism - a rapid auditory temporal-processing deficit said to compromise phonological representations.
Key findings
No significant effect of Fast ForWord on ANY outcome measure, against either active or untreated control groups. There is no evidence that it is effective as a treatment for children's oral language or reading difficulties. The theory motivating the product does not deliver, which is the general shape of mechanism-first commercial interventions.
Genetic confound
Low - RCTs and baseline-equivalent matched comparisons.
Effects
| Outcome | Metric | Value | Measure | Timing | Vs | Horizon | Class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oral language and reading outcomes | pooled effect vs active or untreated controls | no significant effect on any outcome measure | standardized | post-intervention | unclear | end-of-treatment | domain-skill |
Cited by
- Brain Gym, Whole Brain Teaching, and the smaller classroom brain fadsdebunkedconf: mediumgc: low