ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Cross-Sectional Investigation of Brain Volume in Dyslexia.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A neuroanatomical basis for co-occurring low attention and low reading ability.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2026Article
- A discovery and replication study of dyslexia does not reveal reproducible gray matter volume differences.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Right hemisphere engagement in language abilities in older adults: indication of compensation rather than decline.Frontiers in aging · 2025Article
- Shared grey matter correlates of reading and attention.Brain and language · 2023Article
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
The goal of the study was to determine whether dyslexia is associated with differences in local brain volume, and whether these local brain volume differences show cross-sectional age-effects. We investigated the local volume of gray and white brain matter with voxel-based morphometry (VBM) as well as reading performance in three age groups of dyslexic and neurotypical normal reading subjects (children, teenagers and adults). Performance data demonstrate a steady improvement of reading skills in both neurotypical as well as dyslexic readers. However, the pattern of gray matter volumes tell a different story: the children are the only group with significant differences between neurotypical and dyslexic readers in local gray matter brain volume. These differences are localized in brain areas associated with the reading network (angular, middle temporal and inferior temporal gyrus as well as the cerebellum). Yet the comparison of neurotypical and normal readers over the age groups shows that the steady increase in performance in neurotypical readers is accompanied by a steady decrease of gray matter volume, whereas the brain volumes of dyslexic readers do not show this linear correlation between brain volume and performance. This is further evidence that dyslexia is a disorder with a neuroanatomical basis in the form of a lower volume of gray matter in parts of the reading network in early dyslexic readers. The present data point out that network shaping processes in gray matter volume in the reading network does take place over age in dyslexia. Yet this neural foundation does not seem to be sufficient to allow normal reading performances even in adults with dyslexia. Thus dyslexia is a disorder with lifelong consequences, which is why consistent support for affected individuals in their educational and professional careers is of great importance. Longitudinal studies are needed to verify whether this holds as a valid pattern or whether there is evidence of greater interindividual variance in the neuroanatomy of dyslexia.
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.