ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2014
The intergenerational multiple deficit model and the case of dyslexia.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 2 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
83 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Tele-Neuro-Rehabilitation in Italy: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Pooled it
- Oral language deficits in familial dyslexia: A meta-analysis and review.Psychological bulletin · 2016Pooled it
- Dispelling Myths and Misunderstandings About Defining and Remediating Dyslexia.Dyslexia (Chichester, England) · 2026Review
- Relations Between Parents' Math Anxiety and Children's Math Learning: The Role of Homework Help.Developmental science · 2026Article
- Intergenerational transmission of the structure of the auditory cortex and reading skills.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- Reading Disabilities With and Without Co-Occurring ADHD: No Evidence for Additive Impact on Reading Skills.Scientific studies of reading : the official journal of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading · 2026Article
- Fluency Is Good, but Comprehension Is Better: The Impact of Fluency and Comprehension on Mathematical Word Problem Solving.Dyslexia (Chichester, England) · 2026Article
- Specific learning disorders and underlying processes: can WISC-IV subtests predict SLD neurocognitive profiles in Italian children aged 7-14 years?Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Interventions for children and adolescents with specific learning disability and co-occurring disorders.Pediatric research · 2025Review
- Developmental Language Disorder and Risk of Dyslexia-Can They Be Told Apart?Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- *Co-Occurrence and Causality Among ADHD, Dyslexia, and Dyscalculia.Psychological science · 2025Article
- Revisiting the definition of dyslexia.Annals of dyslexia · 2024Article
- Caregiver Self-Efficacy in Relation to Caregivers' History of Language and Reading Difficulties and Children's Shared Reading Experiences.Language, speech, and hearing services in schools · 2024Article
- Unraveling individual differences in learning potential: A dynamic framework for the case of reading development.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2024Review
- Are there distinct subtypes of developmental dyslexia?Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2024Article
- Longitudinal Predictors of Word Reading for Children with Williams Syndrome.Reading and writing · 2023Article
- Article
- Preliteracy Skills Mediate the Relation Between Early Speech Sound Production and Subsequent Reading Outcomes.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2023Article
- Revisiting Multifactor Models of Dyslexia: Do They Fit Empirical Data and What Are Their Implications for Intervention?Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Phoneme Representation and Articulatory Impairment: Insights from Adults with Comorbid Motor Coordination Disorder and Dyslexia.Brain sciences · 2023Article
23 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Which children go on to develop dyslexia? Since dyslexia has a multifactorial etiology, this question can be restated as: what are the factors that put children at high risk for developing dyslexia? It is argued that a useful theoretical framework to address this question is Pennington's (2006) multiple deficit model (MDM). This model replaces models that attribute dyslexia to a single underlying cause. Subsequently, the generalist genes hypothesis for learning (dis)abilities (Plomin and Kovas, 2005) is described and integrated with the MDM. Next, findings are presented from a longitudinal study with children at family risk for dyslexia. Such studies can contribute to testing and specifying the MDM. In this study, risk factors at both the child and family level were investigated. This led to the proposed intergenerational MDM, in which both parents confer liability via intertwined genetic and environmental pathways. Future scientific directions are discussed to investigate parent-offspring resemblance and transmission patterns, which will shed new light on disorder etiology.
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.