35 research outputs found

    Reversing downstream consequences of school hiatus on reading in disadvantaged, at-risk children

    Full text link
    The spread of COVID-19 has led to the disruption of K-12 education for about 90% of the world's student population. The effects on children's academic development are unknown. We examined how disruption in schooling over three consecutive summers in disadvantaged minority children affects reading and whether an intensive intervention can ameliorate these effects. Our data were collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. We applied Latent Change Score models to examine developmental trends in a longitudinal study of reading in 111 economically disadvantaged children, assessed biannually from grades 1 to 4, including 3 summers (for a total of 6 months of school hiatus). The students fell behind the normative population in their ability to understand written texts, a decrease in their relative percentile of 0.25 of a standard deviation each summer, and an effect 3-4 times greater than prior studies suggested. Compared to children in a comparison group, children who received an evidence-based intervention during the school year were better able to maintain their reading scores. These findings provide evidence that disruptions in schooling, for example, those implemented to slow the spread of COVID-19, may have a significant detrimental effect on the reading abilities of disadvantaged children and that children who received a reading intervention were better able to maintain their reading scores during the hiatus. It is critical that policy makers prioritize the allocation of necessary resources to minimize the negative effects on reading this pandemic has wrought on these most disadvantaged children.Support for the work reported in this article was provided by: The Seedlings Foundation. EE was supported by the Ministry of Science and Innovation of Spain (ref. PID2019-107570GAI00 / AEI / doi: https://doi.org/10.13039/501100011033

    Effect of Atomoxetine Treatment on Reading and Phonological Skills in Children with Dyslexia or Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Comorbid Dyslexia in a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES: Evaluated the effects of atomoxetine on the reading abilities of children with dyslexia only or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and comorbid dyslexia. METHODS: Children 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. RESULTS: Atomoxetine-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. CONCLUSIONS: Atomoxetine 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

    Atomoxetine Improved Attention in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Dyslexia in a 16 Week, Acute, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

    Get PDF
    Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate atomoxetine treatment effects in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD-only), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with comorbid dyslexia (ADHD+D), or dyslexia only on ADHD core symptoms and on sluggish cognitive tempo (SCT), working memory, life performance, and self-concept. Methods: Children and adolescents (10?16 years of age) with ADHD+D (n=124), dyslexia-only (n=58), or ADHD-only (n=27) received atomoxetine (1.0?1.4?mg/kg/day) or placebo (ADHD-only subjects received atomoxetine) in a 16 week, acute, randomized, double-blind trial with a 16 week, open-label extension phase (atomoxetine treatment only). Changes from baseline were assessed to weeks 16 and 32 in ADHD Rating Scale-IV-Parent-Version:Investigator-Administered and Scored (ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv); ADHD Rating Scale-IV-Teacher-Version (ADHDRS-IV-Teacher-Version); Life Participation Scale?Child- or Parent-Rated Version (LPS); Kiddie-Sluggish Cognitive Tempo (K-SCT) Interview; Multidimensional Self Concept Scale (MSCS); and Working Memory Test Battery for Children (WMTB-C). Results: At week 16, atomoxetine treatment resulted in significant (p<0.05) improvement from baseline in subjects with ADHD+D versus placebo on ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv Total (primary outcome) and subscales, ADHDRS-IV-Teacher-Version Inattentive subscale, K-SCT Interview Parent and Teacher subscales, and WMTB-C Central Executive component scores; in subjects with Dyslexia-only, atomoxetine versus placebo significantly improved K-SCT Youth subscale scores from baseline. At Week 32, atomoxetine-treated ADHD+D subjects significantly improved from baseline on all measures except MSCS Family subscale and WMTB-C Central Executive and Visuo-spatial Sketchpad component scores. The atomoxetine-treated dyslexia-only subjects significantly improved from baseline to week 32 on ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv Inattentive subscale, K-SCT Parent and Teacher subscales, and WMTB-C Phonological Loop and Central Executive component scores. The atomoxetine-treated ADHD-only subjects significantly improved from baseline to Week 32 on ADHDRS-Parent:Inv Total and subscales, ADHDRS-IV-Teacher-Version Hyperactive/Impulsive subscale, LPS Self-Control and Total, all K-SCT subscales, and MSCS Academic and Competence subscale scores. Conclusions: Atomoxetine treatment improved ADHD symptoms in subjects with ADHD+D and ADHD-only, but not in subjects with dyslexia-only without ADHD. This is the first study to report significant effects of any medication on SCT. Clinical Trials Registration: This study was registered at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home, NCT00607919.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140320/1/cap.2013.0054.pd

    Response to Intervention: Ready or not? Or, from wait-to-fail to watch-them-fail.

    No full text

    Developmental trajectories of white matter structure in children with and without reading impairments

    No full text
    Left temporal-parietal white matter structure is consistently associated with reading abilities in children. A small number of longitudinal studies show that development of this area over time is altered in children with impaired reading. However, it remains unclear how brain developmental patterns relate to specific reading skills such as fluency, which is a critical part of reading comprehension. Here, we examined white matter development trajectories in children with dysfluent reading (20 dysfluent and inaccurate readers, 36 dysfluent and accurate readers) compared to non-impaired readers (n = 14) over 18 months. We found typical age-related increases of fractional anisotropy (FA) in bilateral temporal-parietal areas in non-impaired readers, but a lack of similar changes in dysfluent readers. We also found steeper decreases of mean diffusivity (MD) in the right corona radiata and left uncinate fasciculus in dysfluent inaccurate readers compared to dysfluent accurate readers. Changes in diffusion parameters were correlated with changes in reading scores over time. These results suggest delayed white matter development in dysfluent readers, and show maturational differences between children with different types of reading impairment. Overall, these results highlight the importance of considering developmental trajectories, and demonstrate that the window of plasticity may be different for different children. Keywords: Dyslexia, Reading, Fluency, Accuracy, Diffusion tensor imaging, White matte

    Evaluating Willingness to Pay as a Measure of the Impact of Dyslexia in Adults

    Get PDF
    International audienceWhile much is known about dyslexia in school-age children and adolescents, less is known about its effects on quality of life in adults. Using data from the Connecticut Longitudinal Study, we provide the first estimates of the monetary value of improving reading, speaking, and cognitive skills to dyslexic and nondyslexic adults. Using a stated-preference survey, we find that dyslexic and nondyslexic individuals value improvements in their skills in reading speed, reading aloud, pronunciation, memory, and information retrieval at about the same rate. Because dyslexics have lower self-reported levels on these skills, their total willingness to pay to achieve a high level of skill is substantially greater than for nondyslexics. However, dyslexic individuals’ willingness to pay (averaging 3000foranimprovementinallskillssimultaneously)issmallcomparedwiththedifferenceinearningsbetweendyslexicandnondyslexicadults.Weestimatethatdyslexicindividualsearn153000 for an improvement in all skills simultaneously) is small compared with the difference in earnings between dyslexic and nondyslexic adults. We estimate that dyslexic individuals earn 15% less per year (about 8000) than nondyslexic individuals. Although improvements in reading, speaking, and cognitive skills in adulthood are unlikely to eliminate the earnings difference that reflects differences in educational attainment and other factors, stated-preference estimates of the value of cognitive skills may substantially underestimate the value derived from effects on lifetime earnings and health
    corecore