ArticleNeuropsychology2026
Neurocognitive and behavioral predictors of the simple view of reading in clinically evaluated children with and without ADHD.
Article in Neuropsychology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveChildren with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often exhibit difficulties across multiple reading domains. The "simple view of reading" model posits that reading comprehension skills-both for children with and without ADHD-can be understood by skills in two components: decoding and language comprehension. At the same time, research suggests that weaknesses in neurocognitive abilities, along with behavioral symptoms of ADHD, are closely linked to reading difficulties in this population. However, the most parsimonious set of neurocognitive and behavioral predictors of reading comprehension, and the pathways through which associations are conveyed, remains unclear.
methodThe present study employed structural equation modeling to comprehensively examine neurocognitive and behavioral predictors of reading skills in a clinically evaluated sample of 396 children with and without ADHD (
resultsResults revealed that working memory and fluid intelligence were the strongest neurocognitive predictors of reading skills and inattention and hyperactive/impulsive symptoms each predicted reading in the behavioral model. Consistent with the simple view of reading, associations between neurocognitive or behavioral predictors and reading comprehension were conveyed via decoding and language comprehension. When examining neurocognitive and behavioral predictors together, working memory and fluid intelligence predicted ADHD symptoms and reading skills, whereas ADHD symptoms no longer predicted reading skills, suggesting that neurocognitive weaknesses may help explain the link between inattention and reading.
conclusionsThese findings highlight the role of neurocognitive weaknesses for comprehensively understanding reading difficulties in clinically evaluated children with and without ADHD. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.