ArticleScientific reports2022
Identification and characterization of learning weakness from drawing analysis at the pre-literacy stage.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Quantitative analysis of handwriting kinematics in primary and lower secondary school children through a sensorized ink pen: A cross-sectional population-based study.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Development and validation of machine-learning diagnostic models for identifying frailty in older adults with tuberculosis: a multicentre observational study protocol.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Observational
- Tools and Methods for Diagnosing Developmental Dysgraphia in the Digital Age: A State of the Art.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Deep Learning and Procrustes Analysis for Early Dysgraphia Risk Detection with a Tablet Application.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Handwriting learning delays should be addressed early to prevent their exacerbation and long-lasting consequences on whole children's lives. Ideally, proper training should start even before learning how to write. This work presents a novel method to disclose potential handwriting problems, from a pre-literacy stage, based on drawings instead of words production analysis. Two hundred forty-one kindergartners drew on a tablet, and we computed features known to be distinctive of poor handwriting from symbols drawings. We verified that abnormal features patterns reflected abnormal drawings, and found correspondence in experts' evaluation of the potential risk of developing a learning delay in the graphical sphere. A machine learning model was able to discriminate with 0.75 sensitivity and 0.76 specificity children at risk. Finally, we explained why children were considered at risk by the algorithms to inform teachers on the specific weaknesses that need training. Thanks to this system, early intervention to train specific learning delays will be finally possible.
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.