ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2023
Sensory temporal sampling in time: an integrated model of the TSF and neural noise hypothesis as an etiological pathway for dyslexia.
Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2023. 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.
- Translating the Power of Precision Medicine Into the World of Communication Disorders.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2025Review
- On the Effects of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation Techniques on Developmental Dyslexia: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Iranian journal of psychiatry · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Much progress has been made in research on the causal mechanisms of developmental dyslexia. In recent years, the "temporal sampling" account of dyslexia has evolved considerably, with contributions from neurogenetics and novel imaging methods resulting in a much more complex etiological view of the disorder. The original temporal sampling framework implicates disrupted neural entrainment to speech as a causal factor for atypical phonological representations. Yet, empirical findings have not provided clear evidence of a low-level etiology for this endophenotype. In contrast, the neural noise hypothesis presents a theoretical view of the manifestation of dyslexia from the level of genes to behavior. However, its relative novelty (published in 2017) means that empirical research focused on specific predictions is sparse. The current paper reviews dyslexia research using a dual framework from the temporal sampling and neural noise hypotheses and discusses the complementary nature of these two views of dyslexia. We present an argument for an integrated model of sensory temporal sampling as an etiological pathway for dyslexia. Finally, we conclude with a brief discussion of outstanding questions.
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.