Prevalence Of Reading Disabilities Research Articles

Epidemiology of reading disability: A comparison of DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria

ABSTRACT The present study performed a systematic comparison of DSM-5 and ICD-11 diagnostic criteria for reading disability. We quantitatively investigated the consequences of using DSM-5 or ICD-11, and of the different ways of implementing each diagnostic criterion on the prevalence of reading disability. We did so in a representative sample of the population of French sixth-graders (N = 25,000), using a reading comprehension test to assess reading ability. A compromise set of criteria and thresholds yielded a prevalence of 6.6% according to DSM-5 and 3.5% according to ICD-11. Factors that had the greatest influence on prevalence estimates were the criteria relative to IQ and to interference with academic performance. Compared with the reference population, children with reading disability were more likely to be boys (sex ratio≈1.6), to be schooled in a disadvantaged area (OR≈2.1), and to have lower SES (d≈-0.7), non-verbal IQ (d≈-0.4 – -0.9), and math scores (d≈-1.4). Our results emphasize that the choice of classification and the operationalization of diagnostic criteria have a large impact on who is diagnosed with reading disability.

The Prevalence of Reading Disabilities among Primary Stage Students in the Kingdom of Bahrain

The Prevalence of Reading Disabilities among Primary Stage Students in the Kingdom of Bahrain

Characteristics of Reading Disability Types in Middle School Students Classified ED

Types of reading disabilities (RD) have not yet been investigated in students classified with emotional disturbance (ED). The prevalence of RD and differentiating characteristics were examined in 118 middle school students attending a self-contained school for ED students by defining RDs with reading standard scores <85 on the two clusters of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test–Revised. Half of the students had no RD, whereas 7.6% had only a deficit in phonological processing, 14.4% only a deficit in reading comprehension, and 28.0% deficits in both reading skills. Race and IQ were found to significantly differentiate the four groups and were therefore used as covariates in subsequent comparisons. In addition to significant differences in reading skills and language services, only one symptom category of psychopathology (attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder) produced a significant difference among the groups as well as only one measure of school functioning for 1 year (grade point average for major subjects). These findings indicate the need for comprehensive neuropsychological testing of students with ED and comorbid RD. The proper balance of academic and behavioral interventions is implied. The results also have implications for such students requiring differing programs of reading and related interventions, as well as differing long-term planning for educational needs.

The prevalence of reading disabilities among very-low-birth-weight children at 9 years of age—dyslexics or poor readers?

The prevalence of reading disabilities among very-low-birth-weight children at 9 years of age—dyslexics or poor readers?

The prevalence of reading disabilities among very-low-birth-weight children at 9 years of age—dyslexics or poor readers?

In this study, 70 very-low-birth-weight (VLBW) children (<1500 g) were compared with 72 normal-birth-weight (NBW) children on different academic achievement tests and behavioural skills. The purpose was to address both the prevalence and type of reading difficulties displayed in a sample of VLBW children, and thus the validity of the IQ–achievement discrepancy definition for developmental dyslexia. The results showed that VLBW children performed statistically more poorly on most academic achievement tests. The data also indicated that VLBW children were less likely to be defined as dyslexic compared with NBW children, despite the fact that the number of poor readers was larger in the VLBW group. Finally, there were no differences between poor readers with low intelligence and poor readers with normal intelligence on eight out of nine different tests measuring cognitive processes underlying reading skills. Instead, differences between subgroups of poor readers were found for behavioural variables, indicating that differences between poor readers and dyslexics are mainly restricted to areas outside the reading domain. Thus the results confirm that the distribution of reading skills of poor readers of both high and low intelligence is very similar and that the use of IQ–achievement discrepancy definitions does not constitute a valid approach to define subgroups of poor readers. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Reading Development, Reading Disorders, And Reading Instruction: Research-Based Findings

Reading Development, Reading Disorders, And Reading Instruction: Research-Based Findings

Prevalence of reading disability in boys and girls. Results of the Connecticut Longitudinal Study

Prevalence of reading disability in boys and girls. Results of the Connecticut Longitudinal Study

Metalinguistic awareness and reading strategies

A relatively large group of children does not learn to read with traditional methods of instruction in a regular classroom setting. Although estimates of the prevalence of reading disabilities vary according to the definitions used and according to the severity of the disorder, there is a general consensus that at least 15 percent of school age children have significant reading problems (Harris and Sipay 1975). Many factors, e.g., emotional disturb ance, mental retardation, or lack of opportunity, can interfere with reading acquisition. A distinct group of children, however, apparently does not learn to read because of a neurological dysfunction in the central nervous system which affects the processing of information. Children who fall into this category are often referred to as having a specific learning disability (Johnson and Myklebust 1967). Children so classified, however, do not form a homogeneous group since they exhibit variation in complex patterns of strengths and weaknes ses in information processing. Some of these children fail to learn to read primarily because of difficulty in auditory processing and in applying phonic word attack skills. Johnson and Myklebust (1967) refer to them as auditory dyslexies and Boder (1971) refers to them as dysphonetics. Another group, referred to as visual dyslexies or dyseidetics, has difficulty processing visual information and remembering the visual gestalt of the word. The tendency of these children is to rely upon phonics when reading. Boder (1971) found the dysphonetic group to be significantly larger than the dyseidetic one, 63 percent compared to 9 percent, respectively. In addition to these two groups, however, there are children who exhibit both auditory and visual processing problems, as well as difficulties integrating auditory and visual information.

Attainment and adjustment in two geographical areas. II--The prevalence of specific reading retardation.

Specific reading retardation was found to occur in a minimum of 9-9 per cent of ten-year-old 'indigenous' children in one inner London borough. This rate was nearly three times that (3-9 per cent) in Isle of Wight children. There was a comparably higher rate of general reading backwardness in London (19-0 per cent vs 8-3 per cent). Since the same epidemiological methods were followed in the two areas, and since the reading-retarded children had similar psychological characteristics in both cases, it is concluded that there is a real difference between London and the Isle of Wight in the prevalence of reading retardation and of reading backwardness.

Prevalence of Reading Disability as a Function of the Measure Used

The convenient and popular "years below grade" formula conventionally used to define reading disability operates in an irregular manner and gives a picture of "disability" which is difficult to distinquish from normal variation in human ability. It also causes the prevalence of reading disorders to appear larger as years of schooling increase. Other measures give a more conservative estimate of the prevalence of disability and they may be more significant.