Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38217783›Full record

ArticleAnnals of dyslexia2024

Towards a dynamic, comprehensive conceptualization of dyslexia.

Maryanne Wolf, Rebecca J M Gotlieb, Sohyun An Kim, Veronica Pedroza, Laura V Rhinehart, Maria Luisa Gorno Tempini, Sue Sears

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of dyslexia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Maryanne WolfDepartment of Education, University of California, Moore Hall 2123, 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1521, USA. maryanne@maryannewolf.com.
Rebecca J M GotliebDepartment of Education, University of California, Moore Hall 2123, 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1521, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2103-7809
Sohyun An KimDepartment of Education, University of California, Moore Hall 2123, 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1521, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1718-2421
Veronica PedrozaDepartment of Education, University of California, Moore Hall 2123, 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1521, USA.
Laura V RhinehartDepartment of Education, University of California, Moore Hall 2123, 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1521, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4192-132X
Maria Luisa Gorno TempiniSchool of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7426-7782
Sue SearsMichael D. Eisner College of Education, California State University, Northridge, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Here we build from the central strength of the existing definition of dyslexia-its emphasis on neurobiological origins-and proffer a set of seven core principles for a new, more comprehensive conceptualization of dyslexia. These principles derive from two major research directions: (1) the still evolving history of attempts to explain dyslexia, including in varied writing systems; and (2) the study of the reading brain circuit, its development, and its genetic and environmental influences. What emerges from connecting these two directions is a dynamic conceptualization of dyslexia that incorporates the extensive research on the heterogeneity of dyslexia and the interdependent contributions of multiple biological and socio-cultural risk and preventive factors. A new definition of dyslexia, therefore, needs to transcend both past unitary characterizations and past assumptions based largely on the English orthography. Such a conceptualization references the ways that different languages interact with the reading brain circuit to produce different sources of reading failure. Similarly, the characteristics and consequences of dyslexia that have been considered as secondary sequela (e.g., reduced reading comprehension, social-emotional issues) should be part of a more comprehensive narrative. Of critical importance, any definition of dyslexia should clarify persisting misconceptions that associate dyslexia with a lack of intelligence, potential to learn, or talents. Thus, the overall purpose of such a definition should serve as an instrument of knowledge and an enduring reason for pursuing growth in reading for the individual, the educator, and the public.

Indexed as

DyslexiaReadingBrainHumansLanguageDyslexiaHeterogeneityHistory of dyslexiaReading brain circuitReading subtypesRisk and resiliency

Identifiers

PMID38217783
PMCPMC11413046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.