Luxi Feng, Roeland Hancock, Christa Watson, Rian Bogley, Zachary A Miller, Maria Luisa Gorno-Tempini, Margaret J Briggs-Gowan, Fumiko Hoeft
{"title":"Development of an Abbreviated Adult Reading History Questionnaire (ARHQ-Brief) Using a Machine Learning Approach.","authors":"Luxi Feng, Roeland Hancock, Christa Watson, Rian Bogley, Zachary A Miller, Maria Luisa Gorno-Tempini, Margaret J Briggs-Gowan, Fumiko Hoeft","doi":"10.1177/00222194211047631","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Several crucial reasons exist to determine whether an adult has had a reading disorder (RD) and to predict a child's likelihood of developing RD. The Adult Reading History Questionnaire (ARHQ) is among the most commonly used self-reported questionnaires. High ARHQ scores indicate an increased likelihood that an adult had RD as a child and that their children may develop RD. This study focused on whether a subset of ARHQ items (ARHQ-Brief) could be equally effective in assessing adults' reading history as the full ARHQ. We used a machine learning approach, lasso (known as L1 regularization), and identified 6 of 23 items that resulted in the ARHQ-Brief. Data from 97 adults and 47 children were included. With the ARHQ-Brief, we report a threshold of 0.323 as suitable to identify past likelihood of RD in adults with a sensitivity of 72.4% and a specificity of 81.5%. Comparison of predictive performances between ARHQ-Brief and the full ARHQ showed that ARHQ-Brief explained an additional 10%-35.2% of the variance in adult and child reading. Furthermore, we validated ARHQ-Brief's superior ability to predict reading ability using an independent sample of 28 children. We close by discussing limitations and future directions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":"55 5","pages":"427-442"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8993940/pdf/nihms-1777891.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194211047631","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Several crucial reasons exist to determine whether an adult has had a reading disorder (RD) and to predict a child's likelihood of developing RD. The Adult Reading History Questionnaire (ARHQ) is among the most commonly used self-reported questionnaires. High ARHQ scores indicate an increased likelihood that an adult had RD as a child and that their children may develop RD. This study focused on whether a subset of ARHQ items (ARHQ-Brief) could be equally effective in assessing adults' reading history as the full ARHQ. We used a machine learning approach, lasso (known as L1 regularization), and identified 6 of 23 items that resulted in the ARHQ-Brief. Data from 97 adults and 47 children were included. With the ARHQ-Brief, we report a threshold of 0.323 as suitable to identify past likelihood of RD in adults with a sensitivity of 72.4% and a specificity of 81.5%. Comparison of predictive performances between ARHQ-Brief and the full ARHQ showed that ARHQ-Brief explained an additional 10%-35.2% of the variance in adult and child reading. Furthermore, we validated ARHQ-Brief's superior ability to predict reading ability using an independent sample of 28 children. We close by discussing limitations and future directions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Learning Disabilities (JLD), a multidisciplinary, international publication, presents work and comments related to learning disabilities. Initial consideration of a manuscript depends upon (a) the relevance and usefulness of the content to the readership; (b) how the manuscript compares to other articles dealing with similar content on pertinent variables (e.g., sample size, research design, review of literature); (c) clarity of writing style; and (d) the author"s adherence to APA guidelines. Articles cover such fields as education, psychology, neurology, medicine, law, and counseling.