ArticleCoDAS2026
Preliminary validation of the Brazilian version of SPRouT for screening reading difficulties.
Article in CoDAS, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate preliminary evidence of validity based on relations to external variables for the Brazilian version of the Screening Pediatric Patients for Reading Difficulties Test (SPRouT).
methodsFollowing approval by the Research Ethics Committee, 27 children aged four to eight years were individually assessed using the SPRouT and standardized instruments measuring intelligence and phonological processing skills. Analyses included Spearman correlations (controlling for intelligence) and simple linear regressions to examine the predictive capacity of the SPRouT.
resultsModerate to strong negative correlations were observed between SPRouT scores and measures of phonological awareness, phonological working memory, and rapid naming. The total SPRouT score explained between 23% and 32% of the variance in phonological measures, with medium to large effect sizes.
conclusionFindings provide initial evidence of convergent validity for the SPRouT, as it demonstrated associations with skills related to reading development. Regression analyses also suggest its predictive potential, although longitudinal studies and clinical samples are needed to confirm this property. The SPRouT represents a promising tool for screening reading difficulties, and further psychometric investigations with larger and more diverse samples are recommended.
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.