ArticleAnnals of dyslexia2026
Epilogue: language abilities in persons with dyslexia.
Article in Annals of dyslexia, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Language difficulties are common among individuals with dyslexia and warrant greater consideration across research, advocacy, and clinical practice. For almost a hundred years, language difficulties have been observed in individuals with dyslexia (e.g., Orton, 1928). However, in approximately half of all individuals with dyslexia, language difficulties meet the clinical criteria for developmental language disorder (DLD), an impairment in the comprehension and use of oral language (Bishop et al., 2017; Catts et al., 2003, 2005; Ramus et al., 2013). Even when language difficulties in dyslexia do not meet the clinical threshold for DLD, many subclinical language difficulties persist beyond the point of word-reading remediation (Gallagher et al., 1996). In light of these patterns, this epilogue synthesizes contributions from the special issue on language abilities in persons with dyslexia and identifies four priority areas for the field. First, research design should systematically measure and account for language comorbidity. Secondly, legislative screening policy should be expanded to include broader language comprehension measures alongside current predictors of word reading. Third, special education evaluation practices should incorporate cognitive-linguistic markers, such as nonword and sentence repetition, to differentiate dyslexia from DLD in comorbid presentations. Finally, word-reading intervention research should address the semantic and morpho-syntactic dimensions of language, in addition to phonological and orthographic instruction, to improve automatic word reading. Taken together, these priorities support a more complete account of dyslexia, one that reflects the full range of language profiles and accounts for comorbidity in this population, and is in line with the new definition of dyslexia (IDA, 2025).
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.