Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31597004›Full record

ArticleHuman brain mapping2020

Cerebellar function in children with and without dyslexia during single word processing.

Sikoya M Ashburn, D Lynn Flowers, Eileen M Napoliello, Guinevere F Eden

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human brain mapping, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cerebellar Neuromodulation Impacts Reading Fluency in Young Adults.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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 · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sikoya M AshburnCenter for the Study of Learning, Department of Pediatrics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8499-2080
D Lynn FlowersCenter for the Study of Learning, Department of Pediatrics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Eileen M NapolielloCenter for the Study of Learning, Department of Pediatrics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Guinevere F EdenCenter for the Study of Learning, Department of Pediatrics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5942-1497
Georgetown University · US

Funding

NEUROIMAGING COREP30HD040677 · NICHD · CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI VITTORIO GALLO, VITTORIO GALLO VITTORIO GALLO · 2001 to 2015
$15.9M
Reading and sensorimotor fluency in dyslexiaP50HD040095 · NICHD · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI EDEN, GUINEVERE F. · 2001 to 2006
$7.5M
Predoctoral Training in Intergrative NeuroscienceT32NS041231 · NINDS · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI Ludise Malkova, Ashley S VanMeter · 2001 to 2026
$6.8M
Research_ProjectU54HD090257 · NICHD · CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI GUAY-WOODFORD, LISA MARIE · 2016 to 2020
$5.9M
Translational Biomedical Science Training GrantTL1TR001431 · NCATS · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI LEE, DEXTER L, SANDBERG, KATHRYN L · 2015 to 2024
$4.8M
Supplement for Sikoya Ashburn to "An fMRI Study on the Neural Basis of Combined Math and Reading Disability"R01HD081078 · NICHD · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI EDEN, GUINEVERE F. · 2015 to 2019
$3.0M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001431NICHD NIH HHS P30 HD040677NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD040095NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD081078NICHD NIH HHS U54 HD090257NINDS NIH HHS T32 NS041231
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The cerebellar deficit hypothesis of dyslexia posits that dysfunction of the cerebellum is the underlying cause for reading difficulties observed in this common learning disability. The present study used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and a single word processing task to test for differences in activity and connectivity in children with (n = 23) and without (n = 23) dyslexia. We found cerebellar activity in the control group when word processing was compared to fixation, but not when it was compared to the active baseline task designed to reveal activity specific to reading. In the group with dyslexia there was no cerebellar activity for either contrasts and there were no differences when they were compared to children without dyslexia. Turning to functional connectivity (FC) in the controls, background FC (i.e., not specific to reading) was predominately found between the cerebellum and the occipitaltemporal cortex. In the group with dyslexia, there was background FC between the cerebellum and several cortical regions. When comparing the two groups, they differed in background FC in connections between the seed region right crus I and three left-hemisphere perisylvian target regions. However, there was no task-specific FC for word processing in either group and no between-group differences. Together the results do not support the theory that the cerebellum is affected functionally during reading in children with dyslexia.

Indexed as

ConnectomeReadingCerebellumCerebral CortexChildDyslexiaFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePattern Recognition, Visualcerebellumchilddyslexiafunctional magnetic resonance imagingreadingreading disabilityword processing

Identifiers

PMID31597004
PMCPMC7267899
OpenAlexW2980197022

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.