Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33021019›Full record

ArticleDevelopmental science2021

Bridging sensory and language theories of dyslexia: Toward a multifactorial model.

Gabrielle O'Brien, Jason D Yeatman

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Developmental science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.1field-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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Rapid decay of perceptual memory in dyslexia.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2026
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Linguistic and Cognitive Abilities in Children with Dyslexia: A Comparative Analysis.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Revisiting the definition of dyslexia.Annals of dyslexia · 2024
    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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gabrielle O'BrienInstitute for Learning & Brain Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jason D YeatmanGraduate School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford University · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Auditory Neuroscience Traning ProgramT32DC005361 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Adrian KC Lee, DAVID J PERKEL · 2002 to 2026
$8.8M
Neural mechanisms of successful intervention in children with dyslexiaR01HD095861 · NICHD · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI YEATMAN, JASON D · 2019 to 2024
$3.1M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD095861NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC005361
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Competing theories of dyslexia posit that reading difficulties arise from impaired visual, auditory, phonological, or statistical learning mechanisms. Importantly, many theories posit that dyslexia reflects a cascade of impairments emanating from a single "core deficit". Here we report two studies evaluating core deficit and multifactorial models. In Study 1, we use publicly available data from the Healthy Brain Network to test the accuracy of phonological processing measures for predicting dyslexia diagnosis and find that over 30% of cases are misclassified (sensitivity = 66.7%; specificity = 68.2%). In Study 2, we collect a battery of psychophysical measures of visual motion processing and standardized measures of phonological processing in 106 school-aged children to investigate whether dyslexia is best conceptualized under a core-deficit model, or as a disorder with heterogenous origins. Specifically, by capitalizing on the drift diffusion model to analyze performance on a visual motion discrimination experiment, we show that deficits in visual motion processing, perceptual decision-making, and phonological processing manifest largely independently. Based on statistical models of how variance in reading skill is parceled across measures of visual processing, phonological processing, and decision-making, our results challenge the notion that a unifying deficit characterizes dyslexia. Instead, these findings indicate a model where reading skill is explained by several distinct, additive predictors, or risk factors, of reading (dis)ability.

Indexed as

DyslexiaLanguageChildCognitionHumansPhoneticsReadingVisual Perceptiondeficitdyslexialearningphonologicalpsychophysicsreadingvisual

Identifiers

PMID33021019
PMCPMC8244000
OpenAlexW3089348696

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.