ArticleJCPP advances2023
Heterogeneity in children's reading comprehension difficulties: A latent class approach.
Article in JCPP advances, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structural Brain Correlates of Poor Reading Comprehension.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Language and Beyond: A Registered Report Examining Single and Multiple Risk Models of Later Reading Comprehension Weaknesses.Developmental science · 2025Article
- Exploring Dyslexia Risk Through Psycholinguistic and Orofacial Correlates: Neurodevelopmental Insights Toward a Personalized Medicine Approach.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Reading Skill Profiles in School-Aged Italian-Speaking Children: A Latent Profile Analysis Investigation into the Interplay of Decoding, Comprehension and Attentional Control.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Heterogeneity in children's reading comprehension difficulties: A latent class approach.JCPP advances · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Poor comprehenders are traditionally identified as having below-average reading comprehension, average-range word reading, and a discrepancy between the two. While oral language tends to be low in poor comprehenders, reading is a complex trait and heterogeneity may go undetected by group-level comparisons. Methods: We took a preregistered data-driven approach to identify poor comprehenders and examine whether multiple distinct cognitive profiles underlie their difficulties. Latent mixture modelling identified reading profiles in 6846 children from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, based on reading and listening comprehension assessments at 8-9 years. A second mixture model examined variation in the cognitive profiles of weak comprehenders, using measures of reading, language, working memory, nonverbal ability, and inattention. Results: A poor comprehender profile was not identified by the preregistered model. However, by additionally controlling for overall ability, a 6-class model emerged that incorporated a profile with relatively weak comprehension ( Conclusions: Isolated impairments in specific components of reading are rare, yet a data-driven approach can be used to identify children with relatively weak comprehension. Vocabulary and nonverbal ability were most consistently weak within this group, with broader cognitive difficulties also apparent for a subset of children. These findings suggest that poor comprehension is best characterised along a continuum, and considered in light of multiple risks that influence severity.
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.