Dataset Information

High acceptance of an early dyslexia screening test involving genetic analyses in Germany.

ABSTRACT: Dyslexia is a developmental disorder characterized by severe problems in the acquisition of reading and writing skills. It has a strong neurobiological basis. Genetic influence is estimated at 50-70%. One of the central problems with dyslexia is its late diagnosis, normally not before the end of the 2nd grade, resulting in the loss of several years for early therapy. Currently, research is focusing on the development of early tests for dyslexia, which may be based on EEG and genetics. Our aim was to determine the acceptance of such a future test among parents. We conducted a representative survey in Germany with 1000 parents of children aged 3-7 years, with and without experience of dyslexia. 88.7% of the parents supported the introduction of an early test for dyslexia based on EEG and genetics; 82.8% would have their own children tested, and 57.9% were willing to pay for the test if health insurance did not cover the costs. Test acceptance was significantly higher if parents had prior experience with dyslexia. The perceived benefits of such a test were early recognition and remediation and, preventing deficits. Concerns regarded the precision of the test, its potentially stigmatizing effect and its costs. The high overall support for the test leads to the conclusion that parents would accept a test for dyslexia based on EEG and genetics.

SUBMITTER: Wilcke A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4717194 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

High acceptance of an early dyslexia screening test involving genetic analyses in Germany.

Wilcke Arndt A Müller Bent B Schaadt Gesa G Kirsten Holger H Boltze Johannes J

European journal of human genetics : EJHG 20150603 2

Dyslexia is a developmental disorder characterized by severe problems in the acquisition of reading and writing skills. It has a strong neurobiological basis. Genetic influence is estimated at 50-70%. One of the central problems with dyslexia is its late diagnosis, normally not before the end of the 2nd grade, resulting in the loss of several years for early therapy. Currently, research is focusing on the development of early tests for dyslexia, which may be based on EEG and genetics. Our aim wa ...[more]

PMID: 26036858

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe large and increasing number of new studies published each year is making literature identification in systematic reviews ever more time-consuming and costly. Technological assistance has been suggested as an alternative to the conventional, manual study identification to mitigate the cost, but previous literature has mainly evaluated methods in terms of recall (search sensitivity) and workload reduction. There is a need to also evaluate whether screening prioritization methods leads to the same results and conclusions as exhaustive manual screening. In this study, we examined the impact of one screening prioritization method based on active learning on sensitivity and specificity estimates in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy.MethodsWe simulated the screening process in 48 Cochrane reviews of diagnostic test accuracy and re-run 400 meta-analyses based on a least 3 studies. We compared screening prioritization (with technological assistance) and screening in randomized order (standard practice without technology assistance). We examined if the screening could have been stopped before identifying all relevant studies while still producing reliable summary estimates. For all meta-analyses, we also examined the relationship between the number of relevant studies and the reliability of the final estimates.ResultsThe main meta-analysis in each systematic review could have been performed after screening an average of 30% of the candidate articles (range 0.07 to 100%). No systematic review would have required screening more than 2308 studies, whereas manual screening would have required screening up to 43,363 studies. Despite an average 70% recall, the estimation error would have been 1.3% on average, compared to an average 2% estimation error expected when replicating summary estimate calculations.ConclusionScreening prioritization coupled with stopping criteria in diagnostic test accuracy reviews can reliably detect when the screening process has identified a sufficient number of studies to perform the main meta-analysis with an accuracy within pre-specified tolerance limits. However, many of the systematic reviews did not identify a sufficient number of studies that the meta-analyses were accurate within a 2% limit even with exhaustive manual screening, i.e., using current practice.

Dataset Information

High acceptance of an early dyslexia screening test involving genetic analyses in Germany.

Publications

High acceptance of an early dyslexia screening test involving genetic analyses in Germany.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure