ArticleBrain sciences2024
Predicting Response to Neuropsychological Intervention in Developmental Dyslexia: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Brain sciences, 2024. 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.
- The Impact of Executive Functions on Metaphonological Skills: Correlation and Treatment Implication for ADHD Children.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Identifying the patients who are likely to be non-responders to a certain treatment may allow clinicians to provide alternative strategies and avoid frustration and unrealistic expectations for the patients and their families. A retrospective study on 145 children treated with visual hemisphere-specific stimulation examined the specific profiles (reading, writing, metaphonology, memory, callosal functions) of non-responders, and identified predictors of response to intervention (reading, reading and writing) through linear regression models. The effects of additional variables such as rapid automatized naming (RAN) and Visual Search were investigated in a subsample of 48 participants. Subgroups related to gender and dyslexia subtype were considered in the analyses. The results highlight an Intervention Differential Effect (IDE) not depending on regression to the mean and mathematical coupling effects. The characteristics of non-responders for reading seem to correspond children with mild reading and severe writing impairments; non-responders for reading and writing are those with impaired callosal transfer. Predictors of overall response to intervention were pre-test reading and writing scores; phoneme blending, accuracy in visual search and speed in rapid automatized naming contributed to explaining response variance. Specific predictors for female vs. male participants and dyslexia subtypes were identified.
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.