ArticleDevelopmental science2025
Brain Changes Following Two Reading Interventions in Chinese Children With Reading Disability.
Article in Developmental science, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most behavioral interventions on reading disability (RD) have been developed in alphabetic languages and are phonologically-based. Chinese is a morpho-syllabic language in which each character represents a morpheme and a syllable. Therefore, phonologically-based interventions may not be most helpful in Chinese. In this study, we compared a phonological and a morphological intervention (MI) in Chinese children with RD both behaviorally and neurologically. We recruited 80 fifth-grade Chinese children, including 18 typically developing children as age controls (AC), and 62 children with RD, 22 of whom received the phonological intervention (PI), 22 of whom received the MI, and 18 served as waiting-list controls (WL). An auditory rhyming task and a visual spelling task were employed to examine brain activation before and after the intervention. We found that the PI and MI both effectively improved character naming, sentence reading fluency, one-minute irregular character reading and phonological awareness compared with the WL group. At the brain level, the PI group showed greater increase of brain activation in the right middle temporal gyrus than the MI and WL following the intervention in an auditory rhyming task, suggesting compensatory phonological strategies developed in PI. The MI group showed greater increase of brain activation in the left middle frontal gyrus, left inferior frontal gyrus and left fusiform gyrus than the PI and the WL group following the intervention in a visual spelling task, suggesting functional normalization, because these regions were less activated in children with RD than typical controls before the intervention. These findings suggest intervention-specific brain changes with otherwise similar effectiveness in the behavior. It provides important insights in understanding brain mechanisms underlying behavioral intervention in children with RD. Trial Registration: This study's design was preregistered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300067536), see [https://www.chictr.org.cn].
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.