ArticleJournal of Intelligence2024
Executive Functioning in Different Types of Reading Disabilities.
Article in Journal of Intelligence, 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.
- Cognitive and Linguistic Development in Children and Adolescents.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
Students with reading disabilities form a heterogeneous group: some struggle with accurate and fast reading (dysfluent readers), others with comprehension (poor comprehenders), and some face challenges in both areas (poor readers). Research has indicated a link between executive functioning skills and reading performance; yet, further studies are necessary to fully understand the executive profiles in various types of reading disabilities. The goal of this study was to examine differences in executive functioning among three types of reading disabilities, comparing their performance with that of children without difficulties in either skill (typical readers). Ninety-one students from schools in Portugal participated in the study. The results reveal specific deficits in naming speed and cognitive flexibility in poor readers and dysfluent readers compared to the other groups. Additionally, poor readers exhibited significantly slower processing speed and lower working memory. However, no significant differences were observed in planning. Discriminant function analysis results indicated that the examined executive functions are better at discriminating groups with fluency deficits than those with comprehension difficulties. In conclusion, these results suggest distinct deficit patterns in executive functioning skills across different types of reading disabilities. Taking into account these findings is crucial for effective assessment and intervention with these children.
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.