Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26727308›Full record

SynthesisPsychological bulletin2016

Oral language deficits in familial dyslexia: A meta-analysis and review.

Margaret J Snowling, Monica Melby-Lervåg

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Psychological bulletin, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 148 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
148citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
55.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

148 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 471 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Meta-Analytic Findings on Reading in Children With Cochlear Implants.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Combining Old and New for Better Understanding and Predicting Dyslexia.New directions for child and adolescent development · 2019
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

88 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.

Margaret J SnowlingDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford.ORCID 0000-0003-0836-3861
Monica Melby-LervågDepartment of Special Needs Education, University of Oslo.
University of Oslo · NO

Funding

Wellcome Trust WT082036AIA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article reviews 95 publications (based on 21 independent samples) that have examined children at family risk of reading disorders. We report that children at family risk of dyslexia experience delayed language development as infants and toddlers. In the preschool period, they have significant difficulties in phonological processes as well as with broader language skills and in acquiring the foundations of decoding skill (letter knowledge, phonological awareness and rapid automatized naming [RAN]). Findings are mixed with regard to auditory and visual perception: they do not appear subject to slow motor development, but lack of control for comorbidities confounds interpretation. Longitudinal studies of outcomes show that children at family risk who go on to fulfil criteria for dyslexia have more severe impairments in preschool language than those who are defined as normal readers, but the latter group do less well than controls. Similarly at school age, family risk of dyslexia is associated with significantly poor phonological awareness and literacy skills. Although there is no strong evidence that children at family risk are brought up in an environment that differs significantly from that of controls, their parents tend to have lower educational levels and read less frequently to themselves. Together, the findings suggest that a phonological processing deficit can be conceptualized as an endophenotype of dyslexia that increases the continuous risk of reading difficulties; in turn its impact may be moderated by protective factors. (PsycINFO Database Record

Indexed as

Child, PreschoolDyslexiaHumansInfantLanguage Development DisordersLanguage TestsLiteracyLongitudinal StudiesPhonetics

Identifiers

PMID26727308
PMCPMC4824243
OpenAlexW2321231052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.