Cited by 89Reading and Literacy DevelopmentDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyWriting and Handwriting Education

Inter-relationships among behavioral markers, genes, brain and treatment in dyslexia and dysgraphia

Open access
Berninger, Virginia, Richards, Todd·2010·Future Neurology

Abstract

Cross-country, longitudinal twin studies provide strong evidence for both the biological and environmental basis of dyslexia, and the stability of genetic influences on reading and spelling, even when skills improve in response to instruction. Although DNA studies aimed at identifying gene candidates in dyslexia and related phenotypes (behavioral expression of underlying genotypes); and imaging studies of brain differences between individuals with and without dyslexia and the brain's response to instructional treatment are increasing, this review illustrates, with the findings of one multidisciplinary research center, an emerging trend to investigate the inter-relationships among genetic, brain and instructional treatment findings in the same sample, which are interpreted in reference to a working-memory architecture, for dyslexia (impaired decoding and spelling) and/or dysgraphia (impaired handwriting). General principles for diagnosis and treatment, based on research with children who failed to respond to the regular instructional program, are summarized for children meeting research criteria for having or being at risk for dyslexia or dysgraphia. Research documenting earlier emerging specific oral language impairment during preschool years associated with reading and writing disabilities during school years is also reviewed. Recent seminal advances and projected future trends are discussed for linking brain endophenotypes and gene candidates, identifying transchromosomal interactions, and exploring epigenetics (chemic al modifications of gene expression in response to developmental or environmental changes). Rather than providing final answers, this review highlights past, current and emerging issues in dyslexia research and practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2217/fnl.10.22

Cites

102 of 102 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Genes on chromosome 6 have been linked to phonemic awareness.

    “genes on chromosome 6 have been linked to phonemic awareness (28).”

    From Disorder of written expression and dysgraphia: definition, diagnosis, and management (2020) · cites this paper as [28]

    In “Storing & processing spoken words & their parts” (page unavailable), the paper reports a genetic basis for nonword repetition, but not for phoneme awareness. Its chromosome 6 finding, in “Executive function: inhibition & rapid automatic switching phenotypes” (page unavailable), instead associates a DCDC2 variant with impaired rapid automatic switching and, to some extent, inattention ratings. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Prior assessment studies found that yet other students had significant difficulty with syntax-level listening and reading comprehension and with oral and written expression.

    “Yet others had significant difficulty with syntax level listening and reading comprehension and oral and written expression.”
  • Prior assessment studies found that some students had significant handwriting problems that interfered with spelling and/or composing fluency but not with reading.

    “The assessment studies showed that some students had significant problems with handwriting, which in turn interfered with their spelling and/or composing fluency, but not with reading.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [7]Wise B Rogan L Sessions L Rosenfield S Berninger V Training teachers in evidence-based intervention: the story of linguistic remedies Handbook on Implementing Evidence Based Academic Interventions 2009 443 447 Oxford University Press Oxford, UK
  2. [23]Berninger V Nagy W Carlisle J Foorman B Effective treatment for dyslexics in grades 4 to 6 Preventing and Remediating Reading Difficulties: Bringing Science to Scale 2003 382 417 York Press Timonium, MD, USA
  3. [53]Berninger V Silliman E Mody M Defining and differentiating dyslexia, dysgraphia, and language learning disability within a working memory model Language Impairment and Reading Disability – Interactions Among Brain, Behavior, and Experience 2008 103 134 Guilford Press New York, NY, USA
  4. [59]Cartwright K Flexibility in Literacy Processes and Instructional Practice: Implications of Developing Representational Ability for Literacy Teaching and Learning 2008 Guilford Press NY, USA
  5. [74]Berninger V Richards T Abbott R Alamargot D Bouchand J Lambert E Millogo V Beeddet C The role of the hand in written idea expression Proceedings of the International Conference de la France au Québec 2009 November 2008 University of Poitiers France
  6. [93]Berninger V Abbott S PAL Research-Supported Reading and Writing Lessons and PAL Reproducibles 2003 PsyCorp/Pearson San Antonio, TX, USA
  7. [98]Berninger V Chanquoy L Grigorenko E Mambrino E Preiss D What writing is and how it changes across early and middle childhood development: A multidisciplinary perspective Handbook of Writing: A Mosaic of Perspectives and Views 2010 Psychology Press New York, USA (In Press)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Berninger, V., & Richards, T.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Berninger, Virginia
Venue
Future Neurology
Published
2010-06-29
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
597-617
ISSN
  • 1479-6708 (ISSN-L)
  • 1748-6971
OpenAlex
W2143068011
Cited by
89
References
102
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
6.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Future Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD025858, P50HD033812)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
Keywords
dyslexia, dysgraphia, reading disorders, spelling disability, handwriting, working memory, gene-environment interaction, candidate genes, epigenetics, early intervention, reading instruction, spelling instruction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review