In contrast, a more recent publication noted that, for conventional medicinal interventions, language restrictions did not appear to bias estimates of effectiveness [ 34].
Figure 1 Interaction effects of the EVT-2 between intervention and language background.
The independent variables were participation in the intervention and language spoken at home (English or Spanish).
In the video, London-based Pink Therapy director Dominic Davies and therapist Pamela Gawler-Wright propose an important and thought-provoking intervention into language itself.
Starting with grade weights, additional funding is allocated for a variety of criteria included academic intervention, English language learners, special education students, and portfolio high schools, which include CTE programs, specialized academic or audition, and transfer students.
We set no search limits on study design, study population, type of intervention, or language of publication.
The rather extensive baseline measurements showed only subtle differences regarding education level (higher in the intervention group), language barrier (more frequent in the control phase), and occurrence of diabetes (higher in the control group).
Comparisons of frequency of concealment of allocation, description of double blinding, adequate blinding of patients, trial size, type of intervention, funding, language of publication, and publication year were preplanned.
Furthermore, we lack potentially important information regarding side effects of pharmacological therapy, lifestyle intervention and language barriers [ 37] or health literacy [ 38] which may influence adherence with prescribed medication [ 39].
We excluded 19 full papers, because of ineligible populations (n=10), interventions (n=6), language (n=1), and studies not being randomised controlled trials (n=2).
