What works in Nijmegen
All catalogues · Netherlands profile
Quality scores are 0–100 rubric scores; “strong evidence” reflects study design; adoptions count documented replications elsewhere. Know more
Evidence snapshot for Nijmegen
Research at Radboud University and partner organisations in Nijmegen has produced three evidence-based accessibility and literacy innovations. Ik Onderzoek Mee co-designed a simplified health monitor with 412–296 respondents across three rounds, 47% of whom completed it with personal support, revealing that people with low literacy or mild intellectual disability reported more negative emotions during COVID-19 than the general population. DART, a speech-recognition reading tutor, showed significant reading-accuracy gains in a study of 525 first-graders across 44 schools and now reaches 1,200–1,400 pupils daily through a mainstream Dutch curriculum. By contrast, Dyslexie Font trials with 300+ children found no reading benefit, illustrating that inclusive design claims require independent empirical validation.
Drawn from: Ik Onderzoek Mee — Radboudumc's Co-Designed Health Monitor for People with Low Literacy or Mild Intellectual Disability · Dyslexie Font — A Cautionary Case: Radboud Trials Find No Reading Benefit for Children With Dyslexia · DART — Radboud University's Speech-Recognition Reading Tutor Boosts First-Graders' Decoding Skills in the Netherlands
Generated from this place's cited practices only. Always check the linked sources.
Strengths & weaknesses vs peers
Strengths
Evidence of learning impact +74 pts 100 here · 26 average
Evaluation evidence +52 pts 100 here · 48 average
Scalability & sustainability +38 pts 100 here · 62 average
Documented learning +26 pts 100 here · 74 average
Sustainability (ongoing) +22 pts 100 here · 78 average
Transparency, ethics & data protection +20 pts 67 here · 47 average
Weaknesses
Innovation level -12 pts 50 here · 62 average
Equity & inclusion -17 pts 33 here · 50 average
Demonstrated reach -26 pts 50 here · 76 average
Score profile vs peers
Coloured bar: Nijmegen. Grey bar: peer average across the corpus. Both on a common 0–100 scale.
Points compare this place's average on each dimension with the average across all evaluated places, on a common 0–100 scale. Know more
Top good practices here
Dyslexie Font — A Cautionary Case: Radboud Trials Find No Reading Benefit for Children With Dyslexia · 68
Each number is the practice's overall 0–100 quality score against its catalogue's rubric. Know more
Recommended to adopt or replicate
Transferable practices from elsewhere that address this place's gaps.
Karya — Fair-Wage AI Data-Work Platform Bringing Digital Income to Rural India · fit 100/100
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
safe+natal — Comadrona-Designed Smartphone Checklist for Maternal Risk Screening in Rural Guatemala · fit 100/100
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Digital Green — Video-Mediated Agricultural Extension · fit 100/100
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Kartu Prakerja – National Digital Skills and Financial Inclusion Programme · fit 100/100
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Ushahidi — Kenya's Crowdsourced Crisis-Mapping Platform · fit 82/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Smart City Wien Framework Strategy · fit 82/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Ciudad Mujer — El Salvador's Integrated Women's Services Programme · fit 100/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
Already adopted in 3 other places
SASA! Community Mobilisation Programme against Intimate Partner Violence — Uganda · fit 100/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
Already adopted in 4 other places
Fit estimates how well a practice matches this place, 0 (poor) to 100 (excellent); the list is ordered to favour practices that address this place's gaps. Know more