ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Dyslexia, the Amsterdam Way.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current aim is to illustrate our research on dyslexia conducted at the Developmental Psychology section of the Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, in collaboration with the nationwide IWAL institute for learning disabilities (now RID). The collaborative efforts are institutionalized in the Rudolf Berlin Center. The first series of studies aimed at furthering the understanding of dyslexia using a gamified tool based on an artificial script. Behavioral measures were augmented with diffusion modeling in one study, and indices derived from the electroencephalogram were used in others. Next, we illustrated a series of studies aiming to assess individuals who struggle with reading and spelling using similar research strategies. In one study, we used methodology derived from the machine learning literature. The third series of studies involved intervention targeting the phonics of language. These studies included a network analysis that is now rapidly gaining prominence in the psychopathology literature. Collectively, the studies demonstrate the importance of letter-speech sound mapping and word decoding in the acquisition of reading. It was demonstrated that focusing on these abilities may inform the prediction, classification, and intervention of reading difficulties and their neural underpinnings. A final section examined dyslexia, conceived as a neurobiological disorder. This analysis converged on the conclusion that recent developments in the psychopathology literature inspired by the focus on research domain criteria and network analysis might further the field by staying away from longstanding debates in the dyslexia literature (single vs. a multiple deficit, category vs. dimension, disorder vs. lack of skill).
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.