ArticleDyslexia (Chichester, England)2017
Word Decoding Development during Phonics Instruction in Children at Risk for Dyslexia.
Article in Dyslexia (Chichester, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phonics training for English-speaking poor readers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Beyond Individual Tests: Youths' Cognitive Abilities, Basic Reading, and Writing.Journal of Intelligence · 2024Article
- Word Decoding Development during Phonics Instruction in Children at Risk for Dyslexia.Dyslexia (Chichester, England) · 2017Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present study, we examined the early word decoding development of 73 children at genetic risk of dyslexia and 73 matched controls. We conducted monthly curriculum-embedded word decoding measures during the first 5 months of phonics-based reading instruction followed by standardized word decoding measures halfway and by the end of first grade. In kindergarten, vocabulary, phonological awareness, lexical retrieval, and verbal and visual short-term memory were assessed. The results showed that the children at risk were less skilled in phonemic awareness in kindergarten. During the first 5 months of reading instruction, children at risk were less efficient in word decoding and the discrepancy increased over the months. In subsequent months, the discrepancy prevailed for simple words but increased for more complex words. Phonemic awareness and lexical retrieval predicted the reading development in children at risk and controls to the same extent. It is concluded that children at risk are behind their typical peers in word decoding development starting from the very beginning. Furthermore, it is concluded that the disadvantage increased during phonics instruction and that the same predictors underlie the development of word decoding in the two groups of children. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.