↓ Skip to main content

Dyslexia and Early Intervention: What Did We Learn from the Dutch Dyslexia Programme?

Overview of attention for article published in Dyslexia (10769242), October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Dyslexia and Early Intervention: What Did We Learn from the Dutch Dyslexia Programme?
Published in
Dyslexia (10769242), October 2013
DOI 10.1002/dys.1466
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aryan van der Leij

Abstract

Part of the Dutch Dyslexia Programme has been dedicated to early intervention. The question of whether the genetically affected learning mechanism of children who are at familial risk (FR) of developing dyslexia could be influenced by training phoneme awareness and letter-sound associations in the prereading phase was investigated. The rationale was that intervention studies reveal insights about the weaknesses of the learning mechanisms of FR children. In addition, the studies aimed to gather practical insights to be used in the development of a system of early diagnosis and prevention. Focused on the last period of kindergarten before formal reading instruction starts in Grade 1, intervention methods with comparable samples and designs but differences in delivery mode (use of computer or manual), tutor (semi-professional or parent), location (at school or at home), and additional practices (serial rapid naming or simple word reading) have been executed to test the hypothesis that the incidence and degree of dyslexia can be reduced. The present position paper summarizes the Dutch Dyslexia Programme findings and relates them to findings of other studies. It is discussed that the Dutch studies provide evidence on why prevention of dyslexia is hard to accomplish. It is argued that effective intervention should not only start early but also be adapted to the individual and often long-lasting educational needs of children at risk of reading failure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 192 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 15%
Student > Bachelor 28 14%
Researcher 15 8%
Student > Postgraduate 9 5%
Other 29 15%
Unknown 46 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 46 23%
Social Sciences 37 19%
Neuroscience 11 6%
Linguistics 10 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 4%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 54 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2024.
All research outputs
#8,158,001
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Dyslexia (10769242)
#92
of 325 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,678
of 226,486 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dyslexia (10769242)
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 325 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 226,486 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.