ArticlePaediatrics & child health2023
Responding to parental concern about children's reading.
Article in Paediatrics & child health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and item selection of the language and dyslexia screening questionnaire in primary care settings.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study explored if parents are accurate in their reading concerns, with implications for paediatric practice. Methods: Parents of school-aged children in 34 schools in Ontario, Canada responded to a questionnaire about their children's academic development (27% response), and their children participated in standardized, norm-referenced tests of word reading and an oral sentence recall task. Parental concern status was retrospectively cross-referenced with reading difficulty status (<25th percentile on the word reading tests) for grade 2 children with complete data (n = 294); diagnostic accuracy was evaluated. Demographic and reading-related characteristics of children whose parents' concern did not match their reading difficulty status were explored. Results: Approximately 22% of parents endorsed concern, while 18.5% of children had word reading difficulty. Parental concern status accurately corresponded with reading difficulty status in 81% of cases (95% CI: 76% to 85%). Specificity was 85% (95% CI: 80% to 90%), while sensitivity was 59% (95% CI: 44% to 73%). Children of unconcerned parents rarely had word reading problems (NPV 91%; 95% CI: 88% to 94%), while children with concerned parents had word reading difficulty in 45% of cases (PPV; 95% CI: 36% to 54%). Apparent inaccuracy (i.e., mismatch between parental concern and reading difficulty status) was related to children's word reading, oral sentence recall skills, and English language learner (ELL) status, but not child age, sex, or parent education. Conclusions: Many parents of grade 2 children endorse reading concerns. Parental concern is an overall accurate screener for word reading difficulty, although some children will be missed. Evidence-informed recommendations for responding to parental concern are provided.
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.