↓ 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), January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 153)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
81 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), January 2013
DOI 10.1002/dys.1466
Pubmed ID
Authors

van der Leij A, Leij, Aryan

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.

Twitter Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 2%
Netherlands 2 2%
Germany 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Uruguay 1 1%
Unknown 73 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 19%
Student > Bachelor 13 16%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 20 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 28 35%
Psychology 22 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Arts and Humanities 4 5%
Linguistics 4 5%
Other 18 22%

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 21 October 2016.
All research outputs
#1,696,354
of 7,571,218 outputs
Outputs from Dyslexia (10769242)
#31
of 153 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,852
of 144,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dyslexia (10769242)
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,571,218 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 153 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 144,083 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.