Meta-analysis of Research on Sensory Integration Therapy for Individuals with Developmental and Learning Disabilities

The effectiveness of refutation texts to correct misconceptions among educators.

“…Half of them are backed by robust evidence and the remaining 18 statements have null or very weak evidence and can be considered misconceptions (see Tables 1 and 2). These items were extracted from previous questionnaires (Dekker et al, 2012), meta-analyses (Ferrero, West, & Vadillo, 2017;Hattie, 2009;Leong, Carter, & Stephenson, 2015) Geake, 2008;Hyatt, Stephenson, & Carter, 2009;Muijs & Reynolds, 2011;Waterhouse, 2006), experimental studies (Neuman, Kaefer, Pinkham, & Strouse, 2014) Phase 2. For the purpose of the experiment, we addressed nine of the 18 misconceptions included in the 36-item questionnaire.…”

“…4.14 (0.96) Leong et al (2015) 7. Differences in hemispheric dominance (left brain, right brain) can help explain individual differences among learners.…”

Sensory Integration Therapy Of A Six Year-Old Girl: A Case Study

“…The results of the meta-analysis of the research concerned with SI therapy effectiveness showed that SI can be regarded as therapy providing significant but small effect in comparison to the lack of treatment. However no evidence was found in favour of SI effectiveness in comparison to other kinds of treatment (Leong et al 2015).…”

“…Dysfunction of sensory integration is defined as neurological problem with processing information from the senses (Leong et al 2015). Sensory processing difficulties include dysfunctions in sensory modulation and discrimination as well as problems in motor functioning which have sensory foundation (Kranowitz, 2006).…”

“…Leong and coworkers (2015) performed a meta-analysis of research reports concerned with sensory integration therapy effectiveness. The most important criteria the authors took into consideration were the following elements: use of sessions devoted solely to sensory integration therapy, reference to A. J. Ayres theory, specific description of therapy and stimulation provided for vestibular and proprioceptive system, stimulation of touch, stimulation of other senses like sight, hearing, smell, taste, detailed therapy description, use of diagnostic tools evaluating sensory problems and treatment effectiveness, clear criteria of qualification to treatment, presence of control or alternative therapy group (Leong et al 2015). The research of the analysis revealed that the methodological flaws which could be found in almost all reports taken into consideration were: lack of specific description of sensory diet prescribed, not taking advantage of weighted wests, Wilbarger joint compression and brushing.…”