ArticlePloS one2025
University service utilization patterns in students with specific learning disabilities: An institutional cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis study examined the relationship between university students' use of common and specific services and the presence of specific learning disabilities (SLDs). The objective was to identify how sociodemographic factors, health status, and learning disabilities impact service utilization, with a focus on improving accessibility and support for students with SLDs.
methodsEmploying random but voluntary sampling, a cross-sectional survey of university students was conducted using a tool demonstrating good internal reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.859). The survey collected data on sociodemographics, health status, and self-reported specific learning disabilities (SLDs). Participants assessed their utilization of common university services (e.g., library, academic advising, LMS) and specific support services (e.g., one-to-one meetings, electronic books, dispensatory measures, compensatory tools). Data analysis included frequency distributions, Chi-square tests, Binary Logistic Regression, and Pearson correlation to examine associations between SLDs and service utilization patterns.
resultsParticipants (n = 302) were predominantly male (59.9%) and aged 18-25 years (89.7%), with high rates of dysgraphia (42.7%), dyscalculia (43%), and auditory processing disorder (23.8%). Regression analyses revealed: Frequent use of common services was significantly associated with visual perceptual/motor deficits (aOR=3.87, 95% CI = 1.82-8.21, P < .001), advanced academic year (aOR=1.29, 95% CI = 1.09-1.53, P = 0.004), and positive educational self-perception (aOR=2.32, 95% CI = 1.12-4.80, P = 0.024). For specific services, key predictors included female gender (aOR=2.07, 95% CI = 1.15-3.73, P = 0.015), dyslexia (aOR=2.73, 95% CI = 1.07-6.98, P = 0.036), auditory processing disorder (aOR=2.52, 95% CI = 1.17-5.41, P = 0.018), while sleep disturbances reduced utilization (aOR=0.46, 95% CI = 0.27-0.79, P = 0.005).
conclusionThis study reveals significant underutilization of university services among students with specific learning disabilities (SLDs), despite high prevalence rates. Engagement patterns were strongly influenced by SLD type, academic progression, self-perception, gender, and health factors. To address these barriers, we recommend targeted interventions including: 1) disability-awareness campaigns to reduce stigma, 2) tailored accommodation (e.g., extended time, multimodal materials) aligned with specific SLD profiles, and 3) mandatory faculty training on inclusive instructional strategies and available support resources. These evidence-based measures are critical for improving accessibility and academic success for this vulnerable population.
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.