3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Early Identification of Dyslexia: Understanding the Issues

      1 , 2 , 3 , 4
      Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools
      American Speech Language Hearing Association

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          The purpose of this tutorial is to provide an overview of the benefits and challenges associated with the early identification of dyslexia.

          Method

          The literature on the early identification of dyslexia is reviewed. Theoretical arguments and research evidence are summarized. An overview of response to intervention as a method of early identification is provided, and the benefits and challenges associated with it are discussed. Finally, the role of speech-language pathologists in the early identification process is addressed.

          Conclusions

          Early identification of dyslexia is crucial to ensure that children are able to maximize their educational potential, and speech-language pathologists are well placed to play a role in this process. However, early identification alone is not sufficient—difficulties with reading may persist or become apparent later in schooling. Therefore, continuing progress monitoring and access to suitable intervention programs are essential.

          Abstract

          Related collections

          Most cited references90

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Decoding, Reading, and Reading Disability

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Literacy and health outcomes: a systematic review of the literature.

            To review the relationship between literacy and health outcomes. We searched MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Public Affairs Information Service (PAIS), Industrial and Labor Relations Review (ILLR), PsychInfo, and Ageline from 1980 to 2003. We included observational studies that reported original data, measured literacy with any valid instrument, and measured one or more health outcomes. Two abstractors reviewed each study for inclusion and resolved disagreements by discussion. One reviewer abstracted data from each article into an evidence table; the second reviewer checked each entry. The whole study team reconciled disagreements about information in evidence tables. Both data extractors independently completed an 11-item quality scale for each article; scores were averaged to give a final measure of article quality. We reviewed 3,015 titles and abstracts and pulled 684 articles for full review; 73 articles met inclusion criteria and, of those, 44 addressed the questions of this report. Patients with low literacy had poorer health outcomes, including knowledge, intermediate disease markers, measures of morbidity, general health status, and use of health resources. Patients with low literacy were generally 1.5 to 3 times more likely to experience a given poor outcome. The average quality of the articles was fair to good. Most studies were cross-sectional in design; many failed to address adequately confounding and the use of multiple comparisons. Low literacy is associated with several adverse health outcomes. Future research, using more rigorous methods, will better define these relationships and guide developers of new interventions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review.

              It has been suggested that working memory training programs are effective both as treatments for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and other cognitive disorders in children and as a tool to improve cognitive ability and scholastic attainment in typically developing children and adults. However, effects across studies appear to be variable, and a systematic meta-analytic review was undertaken. To be included in the review, studies had to be randomized controlled trials or quasi-experiments without randomization, have a treatment, and have either a treated group or an untreated control group. Twenty-three studies with 30 group comparisons met the criteria for inclusion. The studies included involved clinical samples and samples of typically developing children and adults. Meta-analyses indicated that the programs produced reliable short-term improvements in working memory skills. For verbal working memory, these near-transfer effects were not sustained at follow-up, whereas for visuospatial working memory, limited evidence suggested that such effects might be maintained. More importantly, there was no convincing evidence of the generalization of working memory training to other skills (nonverbal and verbal ability, inhibitory processes in attention, word decoding, and arithmetic). The authors conclude that memory training programs appear to produce short-term, specific training effects that do not generalize. Possible limitations of the review (including age differences in the samples and the variety of different clinical conditions included) are noted. However, current findings cast doubt on both the clinical relevance of working memory training programs and their utility as methods of enhancing cognitive functioning in typically developing children and healthy adults. (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools
                LSHSS
                American Speech Language Hearing Association
                0161-1461
                1558-9129
                October 24 2018
                October 24 2018
                : 49
                : 4
                : 817-828
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, United Kingdom
                [2 ]Department of Cognitive Science, ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders (CCD), Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
                [3 ]Department of Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham England
                [4 ]Centre for Advances in Behavioural Science, Coventry University, England
                Article
                10.1044/2018_LSHSS-DYSLC-18-0007
                d78777fe-e4a1-40de-a40a-6cde6589ffe8
                © 2018

                Comments

                Comment on this article