ArticleAnnals of dyslexia2023
A national test of dyslexia.
Article in Annals of dyslexia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Towards a Consensus for Dyslexia Practice: Findings of a Delphi Study on Assessment and Identification.Dyslexia (Chichester, England) · 2025Article
- Prevalence of risk for dyslexia, risk for dyscalculia, and their comorbidity in Spanish primary education: gender difference and socioeconomic status.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Overt Word Reading and Visual Object Naming in Adults with Dyslexia: Electroencephalography Study in Transparent Orthography.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Early life stress, literacy and dyslexia: an evolutionary perspective.Brain structure & function · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Different definitions and tests of dyslexia can cause unfairness and make life difficult for people with dyslexia as well as for the professionals. In 2012, the Danish government decided to support the fight against dyslexia. The government issued a public tender for the development of "a standardized, electronically administered test of dyslexia for use […] from primary Grade 3 and up through all educational levels to 5-year university education." The present paper reports from the development of this National Dyslexia Test. The paper focuses on the definition of dyslexia and the composition, reliability, and validity of the test. Data from the development of the test demonstrate the psychometric properties of the test. Reliability was indicated by a high agreement between the two (computer-administered) measures that are part of the test. External convergent validity was indicated by a high agreement between test results and results from prior practice and by agreement between test results and reading comprehension of educational texts. The paper concludes with a discussion of the practical uses and potential issues with the test since its release in 2015.
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.