This study is designed to advance the promising yet underutilized research on retrieval practice by evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of two key retrieval practice features (feedback and spacing). The study uses four single case adapted alternating treatments studies, each with 5- to 9-year-old children who are deaf and hard of hearing to evaluate the effects of feedback and spacing on the efficiency of word learning and retention.
Age range
5 Years – 9 Years
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
Labeling - Acquisition Effectiveness
Timeframe: End of intervention. The intervention ends when the participant achieves >75% accuracy 3 sessions in a row (up to 6 months).
Labeling - Acquisition Efficiency
Timeframe: End of intervention. The intervention ends when the participant achieves >75% accuracy 3 sessions in a row (up to 6 months).
Labeling - Retention Effectiveness
Timeframe: Four weeks after the intervention ends
Labeling - Retention Efficiency
Timeframe: Four weeks after the intervention ends