Dataset Information

Language Skills, but Not Frequency Discrimination, Predict Reading Skills in Children at Risk of Dyslexia.

ABSTRACT: This study evaluated the claim that auditory processing deficits are a cause of reading and language difficulties. We report a longitudinal study of 245 children at family risk of dyslexia, children with preschool language impairments, and control children. Children with language impairments had poorer frequency-discrimination thresholds than controls at 5.5 years, but children at family risk of dyslexia did not. A model assessing longitudinal relationships among frequency discrimination, reading, language, and executive function skills showed that frequency discrimination was predicted by executive skills but was not a longitudinal predictor of reading or language skills. Our findings contradict the hypothesis that frequency discrimination is causally related to dyslexia or language impairment and suggest that individuals at risk for dyslexia or who have language impairments may perform poorly on auditory processing tasks because of comorbid attentional difficulties.

SUBMITTER: Snowling MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6088504 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Language Skills, but Not Frequency Discrimination, Predict Reading Skills in Children at Risk of Dyslexia.

Snowling Margaret J MJ Gooch Debbie D McArthur Genevieve G Hulme Charles C

Psychological science 20180523 8

This study evaluated the claim that auditory processing deficits are a cause of reading and language difficulties. We report a longitudinal study of 245 children at family risk of dyslexia, children with preschool language impairments, and control children. Children with language impairments had poorer frequency-discrimination thresholds than controls at 5.5 years, but children at family risk of dyslexia did not. A model assessing longitudinal relationships among frequency discrimination, readin ...[more]

PMID: 29791271

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe present study investigated differences in reading and spelling outcomes in Dutch and English as a second language (ESL) in adolescents with a high familial risk of dyslexia, of whom some have developed dyslexia (HRDys) while others have not (HRnonDys), in comparison to a low familial risk control group without dyslexia (LRnonDys). This allowed us to investigate the persistence of dyslexia in the first language (L1) and the effect of dyslexia on the second language (L2), which has, in this case, a lower orthographic transparency. Furthermore, the inclusion of the HRnonDys group allowed us to investigate the continuity of the familial risk of dyslexia, as previous studies observed that the HRnonDys group often scores in between the HRDys and LRnonDys group, and whether these readers without reading deficits in Dutch, have more reading difficulties in ESL.MethodsThe data of three groups of adolescents were analyzed; 27 LRnonDys, 25 HRdys 25 HRnonDys. The mean age was 14;1 years; months, and 37 were male. All were native speakers of Dutch, attended regular secondary education (grade 7-10), and were non-native speakers of English. Using MANOVA the groups were compared on Dutch and English word reading fluency (WRF), spelling and vocabulary, Dutch pseudoword and loanword reading fluency, phonological awareness (PA), rapid automatized naming (RAN), and verbal short term and working memory. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare English and Dutch WRF, spelling and vocabulary directly within the three groups.ResultsThe analyses revealed that the HRDys group had a deficit in both reading and spelling in Dutch and ESL. They also performed poorer than the LRnonDys group on all other measures. Effect sizes were especially large for pseudoword reading and the reaction times during the PA task. The HRnonDys group scored generally poorer than the LRnonDys group but this difference was only significant for Dutch pseudoword reading, PA reaction times and verbal short term memory. In general the HRDys and HRnonDys group scored similar in Dutch and English, except for English WRF where the HRDys group scored slightly better than expected based on their Dutch WRF.DiscussionThere was a high persistence of dyslexia. Adolescents with dyslexia had large impairments in reading and spelling, and reading related measures, both in Dutch and ESL. Despite high inter-individual differences, an overall three-step pattern was observed. Adolescents in the HRnonDys group scored in between the HRDys and LRnonDys group, supporting the polygenetic origin of dyslexia and the continuity of the familial risk of dyslexia. The lower orthographic transparency did not have a negative effect on L2 reading, spelling and vocabulary, both in the HRnonDys and HRDys group. The latter group performed slightly better than expected in L2, which may be a result of the massive exposure to English and high motivation to use English by adolescents.

Project description:ObjectivesEvaluated the effects of atomoxetine on the reading abilities of children with dyslexia only or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and comorbid dyslexia.MethodsChildren aged 10-16 years (N = 209) met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for dyslexia only (n = 58), ADHD and comorbid dyslexia (n = 124), or ADHD only (n = 27) and were of normal intelligence. Patients were treated with atomoxetine (1.0-1.4 mg/kg/day) or placebo in a 16-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. The dyslexia-only and ADHD and comorbid dyslexia groups were randomized 1:1; the ADHD-only group received atomoxetine in a blinded manner. Reading abilities were measured with the Woodcock Johnson III (WJIII), Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP), Gray Oral Reading Tests-4, and Test of Word Reading Efficiency.ResultsAtomoxetine-treated dyslexia-only patients compared with placebo patients had significantly greater improvement (p < 0.02) with moderate to approaching high effect sizes (ES) on WJIII Word Attack (ES = 0.72), Basic Reading Skills (ES = 0.48), and Reading Vocabulary (ES = 0.73). In the atomoxetine-treated ADHD and comorbid dyslexia group, improvement on the CTOPP Elision measure (ES = 0.50) was significantly greater compared with placebo (p < 0.02). Total, inattentive, and hyperactive/impulsive ADHD symptom reductions were significant in the atomoxetine-treated ADHD and comorbid dyslexia group compared with placebo, and from baseline in the ADHD-only group (p ≤ 0.02). ADHD symptom improvements in the ADHD and comorbid dyslexia group were not correlated with improvements in reading.ConclusionsAtomoxetine treatment improved reading scores in patients with dyslexia only and ADHD and comorbid dyslexia. Improvements for patients with dyslexia only were in critical components of reading, including decoding and reading vocabulary. For patients with ADHD and comorbid dyslexia, improvements in reading scores were distinct from improvement in ADHD inattention symptoms alone. These data represent the first report of improvements in reading measures following pharmacotherapy treatment in patients with dyslexia only evaluated in a randomized, double-blind trial.

Dataset Information

Language Skills, but Not Frequency Discrimination, Predict Reading Skills in Children at Risk of Dyslexia.

Publications

Language Skills, but Not Frequency Discrimination, Predict Reading Skills in Children at Risk of Dyslexia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets