SynthesisNeuropsychology review2024
Hand Preference in Stuttering: Meta-Analyses.
Synthesis in Neuropsychology review, 2024. 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.
- No evidence of altered language laterality in people who stutter across different brain imaging studies of speech and language.Brain communications · 2024Article
- Behavioral lateralization in bipolar disorders: a systematic review.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reduced hemispheric asymmetries, as well as their behavioral manifestation in the form of atypical handedness (i.e., non-right, left-, or mixed-handedness), are linked to neurodevelopmental disorders, such as autism spectrum disorder, and several psychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia. One neurodevelopmental disorder that is associated with reduced hemispheric asymmetries, but for which findings on behavioral laterality are conflicting, is stuttering. Here, we report a series of meta-analyses of studies that report handedness (assessed as hand preference) levels in individuals who stutter (otherwise healthy) compared to controls. For this purpose, articles were identified via a search in PubMed, Scopus, and PsycInfo (13 June 2023). On the basis of k = 52 identified studies totaling n = 2590 individuals who stutter and n = 17,148 controls, five random effects meta-analyses were conducted: four using the odds ratio [left-handers (forced choice); left-handers (extreme); mixed-handers; non-right-handers vs. total)] and one using the standardized difference in means as the effect size. We did not find evidence of a left (extreme)- or mixed-handedness difference or a difference in mean handedness scores, but evidence did emerge, when it came to left-handedness (forced-choice) and (inconclusively for) non-right-handedness. Risk-of-bias analysis was not deemed necessary in the context of these meta-analyses. Differences in hand skill or strength of handedness could not be assessed as no pertinent studies were located. Severity of stuttering could not be used s a moderator, as too few studies broke down their data according to severity. Our findings do not allow for firm conclusions to be drawn on whether stuttering is associated with reduced hemispheric asymmetries, at least when it comes to their behavioral manifestation.
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.