ArticleBMC neuroscience2009
Brain classification reveals the right cerebellum as the best biomarker of dyslexia.
Article in BMC neuroscience, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
61 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Probing the linguistic cerebellum: a qualitative review of the effects of cerebellar neurostimulation on language processing.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Structural abnormalities in the dyslexic brain: a meta-analysis of voxel-based morphometry studies.Human brain mapping · 2013Pooled it
- Procedural learning is impaired in dyslexia: evidence from a meta-analysis of serial reaction time studies.Research in developmental disabilities · 2013Pooled it
- Grey matter alterations co-localize with functional abnormalities in developmental dyslexia: an ALE meta-analysis.PloS one · 2012Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A discovery and replication study of dyslexia does not reveal reproducible gray matter volume differences.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Examining the Cerebral-Cerebellar Connectivity During Spelling Tasks.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
- Multimodal investigation of the neurocognitive deficits underlying dyslexia in adulthood.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- New Perspectives on Non-Invasive Cerebellar Stimulation for Social and Affective Functions in Children and Adolescents.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2025Review
- Cortical Structure in Pre-Readers at Cognitive Risk for Dyslexia: Baseline Differences and Response to Intervention.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Disrupted network interactions serve as a neural marker of dyslexia.Communications biology · 2023Article
- A Scoping Review on Movement, Neurobiology and Functional Deficits in Dyslexia: Suggestions for a Three-Fold Integrated Perspective.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Comparison of children with and without dyslexia using functional head impulse test and pediatric balance scale.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Extraction of discriminative features from EEG signals of dyslexic children; before and after the treatment.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2022Article
- Evidence of Altered Functional Connectivity at Rest in the Writing Network of Children with Dyslexia.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Decoding the role of the cerebellum in the early stages of reading acquisition.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2021Article
- The Neurological Basis of Developmental Dyslexia and Related Disorders: A Reappraisal of the Temporal Hypothesis, Twenty Years on.Brain sciences · 2021Review
- Functional parcellation of the right cerebellar lobule VI in children with normal or impaired reading.Neuropsychologia · 2020Article
- Creating an Internal Environment of Cognitive and Psycho-Emotional Well-Being through an External Movement-Based Environment: An Overview of Quadrato Motor Training.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Review
- Development of Dyslexia: The Delayed Neural Commitment Framework.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2019Article
1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDevelopmental dyslexia is a specific cognitive disorder in reading acquisition that has genetic and neurological origins. Despite histological evidence for brain differences in dyslexia, we recently demonstrated that in large cohort of subjects, no differences between control and dyslexic readers can be found at the macroscopic level (MRI voxel), because of large variances in brain local volumes. In the present study, we aimed at finding brain areas that most discriminate dyslexic from control normal readers despite the large variance across subjects. After segmenting brain grey matter, normalizing brain size and shape and modulating the voxels' content, normal readers' brains were used to build a 'typical' brain via bootstrapped confidence intervals. Each dyslexic reader's brain was then classified independently at each voxel as being within or outside the normal range. We used this simple strategy to build a brain map showing regional percentages of differences between groups. The significance of this map was then assessed using a randomization technique.
resultsThe right cerebellar declive and the right lentiform nucleus were the two areas that significantly differed the most between groups with 100% of the dyslexic subjects (N = 38) falling outside of the control group (N = 39) 95% confidence interval boundaries. The clinical relevance of this result was assessed by inquiring cognitive brain-based differences among dyslexic brain subgroups in comparison to normal readers' performances. The strongest difference between dyslexic subgroups was observed between subjects with lower cerebellar declive (LCD) grey matter volumes than controls and subjects with higher cerebellar declive (HCD) grey matter volumes than controls. Dyslexic subjects with LCD volumes performed worse than subjects with HCD volumes in phonologically and lexicon related tasks. Furthermore, cerebellar and lentiform grey matter volumes interacted in dyslexic subjects, so that lower and higher lentiform grey matter volumes compared to controls differently modulated the phonological and lexical performances. Best performances (observed in controls) corresponded to an optimal value of grey matter and they dropped for higher or lower volumes.
conclusionThese results provide evidence for the existence of various subtypes of dyslexia characterized by different brain phenotypes. In addition, behavioural analyses suggest that these brain phenotypes relate to different deficits of automatization of language-based processes such as grapheme/phoneme correspondence and/or rapid access to lexicon entries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.