Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29876258›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2018

Dyscalculia and dyslexia: Different behavioral, yet similar brain activity profiles during arithmetic.

Lien Peters, Jessica Bulthé, Nicky Daniels, Hans Op de Beeck, Bert De Smedt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. White matter and literacy: A dynamic system in flux.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Lien PetersParenting and Special Education Research Unit, KU Leuven, Belgium; Brain and Cognition Research Unit, KU Leuven, Belgium; Numerical Cognition Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Brain and Mind Institute, Western University, Canada. Electronic address: Lien.Peters@kuleuven.be.
Jessica BulthéBrain and Cognition Research Unit, KU Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: Jessica.Bulthe@kuleuven.be.
Nicky DanielsBrain and Cognition Research Unit, KU Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: Nicky.Daniels@kuleuven.be.
Hans Op de BeeckBrain and Cognition Research Unit, KU Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: Hans.OpdeBeeck@kuleuven.be.
Bert De SmedtParenting and Special Education Research Unit, KU Leuven, Belgium. Electronic address: Bert.DeSmedt@kuleuven.be.
VIB-KU Leuven Center for Brain & Disease Research · BEKU Leuven · BEWestern University · CA

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF I 2425European Research Council 284101
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brain disorders are often investigated in isolation, but very different conclusions might be reached when studies directly contrast multiple disorders. Here, we illustrate this in the context of specific learning disorders, such as dyscalculia and dyslexia. While children with dyscalculia show deficits in arithmetic, children with dyslexia present with reading difficulties. Furthermore, the comorbidity between dyslexia and dyscalculia is surprisingly high. Different hypotheses have been proposed on the origin of these disorders (number processing deficits in dyscalculia, phonological deficits in dyslexia) but these have never been directly contrasted in one brain imaging study. Therefore, we compared the brain activity of children with dyslexia, children with dyscalculia, children with comorbid dyslexia/dyscalculia and healthy controls during arithmetic in a design that allowed us to disentangle various processes that might be associated with the specific or common neural origins of these learning disorders. Participants were 62 children aged 9 to 12, 39 of whom had been clinically diagnosed with a specific learning disorder (dyscalculia and/or dyslexia). All children underwent fMRI scanning while performing an arithmetic task in different formats (dot arrays, digits and number words). At the behavioral level, children with dyscalculia showed lower accuracy when subtracting dot arrays, and all children with learning disorders were slower in responding compared to typically developing children (especially in symbolic formats). However, at the neural level, analyses pointed towards substantial neural similarity between children with learning disorders: Control children demonstrated higher activation levels in frontal and parietal areas than the three groups of children with learning disorders, regardless of the disorder. A direct comparison between the groups of children with learning disorders revealed similar levels of neural activation throughout the brain across these groups. Multivariate subject generalization analyses were used to statistically test the degree of similarity, and confirmed that the neural activation patterns of children with dyslexia, dyscalculia and dyslexia/dyscalculia were highly similar in how they deviated from neural activation patterns in control children. Collectively, these results suggest that, despite differences at the behavioral level, the brain activity profiles of children with different learning disorders during arithmetic may be more similar than initially thought.

Indexed as

MathematicsBrainChildDyscalculiaDyslexiaFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleProblem SolvingArithmeticChildrenDyscalculiaDyslexiafMRI

Identifiers

PMID29876258
PMCPMC5987869
OpenAlexW2789670585

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.