ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Heterogeneity of Dyscalculia Risk Dependent on the Type of Number Line Estimation Task and the Number Magnitude.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- When Development Falls out of Sync: A Developmental Timing Framework for Learning Disabilities.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- AI-Enhanced Dyscalculia Screening: A Survey of Methods and Applications for Children.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An ability that is impaired in developmental dyscalculia (DD) is related to number line estimation (NLE). However, due to variability in NLE task performance, group differences do not exemplify the real difficulty level observed in the DD population. Thirty-two of the fifty-two participants posing dyscalculia risk (DR) (mean age = 9.88) experienced difficulties in mathematics. All the children performed two number-to-position tasks and two tasks requiring a verbal estimation of a number indicated on a line, utilizing the ranges 0-100 and 0-1000. The results showed that the estimation error in the verbal task was greater in the DR group than in the typically developed (TD) group for the 0-1000 range. In the number-to-position task, group differences were found for both ranges and the variability within both groups was smaller than it was in the verbal tasks. Analyses of each of the 26 numerical magnitudes revealed a more comprehensive pattern. The majority of the group effects were related to the 0-1000 line. Therefore, considerable data variability, especially in the DD group, suggests this issue must be analyzed carefully in the case of other mathematical capacities. It also critically questions some well-established phenomena and norms in experimental and diagnostic practices.
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.