ArticleDyslexia (Chichester, England)2025
Towards a Consensus for Dyslexia Practice: Findings of a Delphi Study on Assessment and Identification.
Article in Dyslexia (Chichester, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Debating the Delphi View of Dyslexia: A Response to Metsala, Morsanyi and Colleagues.Dyslexia (Chichester, England) · 2026Article
- Dispelling Myths and Misunderstandings About Defining and Remediating Dyslexia.Dyslexia (Chichester, England) · 2026Review
- Consensus Without Clarity for Dyslexia Identification: A Commentary on Holden et al.Dyslexia (Chichester, England) · 2026Article
- Toward an Improved Understanding of Dyslexia: Reflections on a New Consensus Definition and Its Implications.Dyslexia (Chichester, England) · 2026Article
- Differential profiles of reading development in neurodevelopmental disorders under an adapted tier 2 response to Intervention protocol.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Procedural or declarative deficit in adults with developmental dyslexia? A study of Artificial grammar learning.PloS one · 2026Article
- Diversity of words and words for diversity.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Neural Mechanisms Underlying Reading Impairment in Children Learning a Second Language: A Review.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Language skills of adults with dyslexia in English as a foreign language: proposal of a language spontaneity deficit hypothesis.Annals of dyslexia · 2025Article
- The role of self-compassion in adults with dyslexia.Annals of dyslexia · 2025Article
- Toward a consensus on dyslexia: findings from a Delphi study.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper discusses the findings of a Delphi study in which dyslexia experts, including academics, specialist teachers, educational psychologists, and individuals with dyslexia, were asked for their agreement with a set of key statements about defining and identifying dyslexia: why it should be assessed and how and when this assessment should be conducted. Two rounds of survey responses provided a vehicle for moving towards consensus on how to assess for dyslexia. Forty-two consensus statements were ultimately accepted. Findings suggested that assessment practice should take account of risks to the accurate identification of dyslexia. An assessment model, with guidelines for assessors, is presented, based on the Delphi's findings. This hypothesis-testing model requires assessors to investigate and weigh up the factors most likely to result in an accurate assessment before reaching conclusions, assigning terminology, and making recommendations for intervention and management.
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.