Validation and Reliability of the Dyslexia Adult Checklist in Screening for Dyslexia

IF 1.9 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Dyslexia Pub Date : 2024-12-11 DOI:10.1002/dys.1797
Z. Stark, K. Elalouf, V. Soldano, L. Franzen, A. P. Johnson
{"title":"Validation and Reliability of the Dyslexia Adult Checklist in Screening for Dyslexia","authors":"Z. Stark,&nbsp;K. Elalouf,&nbsp;V. Soldano,&nbsp;L. Franzen,&nbsp;A. P. Johnson","doi":"10.1002/dys.1797","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Dyslexia is a language-based neurobiological and developmental learning disability marked by inaccurate and disfluent word recognition, poor decoding, and difficulty spelling. Individuals can be diagnosed with and experience symptoms of dyslexia throughout their lifespan. Screening tools such as the Dyslexia Adult Checklist allow individuals to self-evaluate common risk factors of dyslexia prior to or in lieu of obtaining costly and timely psychoeducational assessments. Although widely available online, the Dyslexia Adult Checklist has yet to be validated. The purpose of this study was to validate this Checklist in a sample of adults with and without dyslexia using both univariate and multivariate statistical approaches. We hypothesised that the Dyslexia Adult Checklist would accurately distinguish between individuals with a self-reported diagnosis of dyslexia (<i>n</i> = 200) and a control group (<i>n</i> = 200), as measured by total scores on the screening tool. Results from our sample found the Dyslexia Adult Checklist to be valid (Cronbach's α = 0.86), and reliable (sensitivity = 76%–91.5%, specificity = 80%–88%). Compared to the originally proposed cut-off score of 45, given the higher sensitivity rate and negative predictive value, we recommend researchers and clinicians use a cut-off score of 40 to indicate possible mild to severe symptoms of dyslexia when using the Dyslexia Adult Checklist.</p>","PeriodicalId":47222,"journal":{"name":"Dyslexia","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11632572/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dyslexia","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dys.1797","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dyslexia is a language-based neurobiological and developmental learning disability marked by inaccurate and disfluent word recognition, poor decoding, and difficulty spelling. Individuals can be diagnosed with and experience symptoms of dyslexia throughout their lifespan. Screening tools such as the Dyslexia Adult Checklist allow individuals to self-evaluate common risk factors of dyslexia prior to or in lieu of obtaining costly and timely psychoeducational assessments. Although widely available online, the Dyslexia Adult Checklist has yet to be validated. The purpose of this study was to validate this Checklist in a sample of adults with and without dyslexia using both univariate and multivariate statistical approaches. We hypothesised that the Dyslexia Adult Checklist would accurately distinguish between individuals with a self-reported diagnosis of dyslexia (n = 200) and a control group (n = 200), as measured by total scores on the screening tool. Results from our sample found the Dyslexia Adult Checklist to be valid (Cronbach's α = 0.86), and reliable (sensitivity = 76%–91.5%, specificity = 80%–88%). Compared to the originally proposed cut-off score of 45, given the higher sensitivity rate and negative predictive value, we recommend researchers and clinicians use a cut-off score of 40 to indicate possible mild to severe symptoms of dyslexia when using the Dyslexia Adult Checklist.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
成人阅读障碍检查表筛查阅读障碍的有效性和可靠性。
阅读障碍是一种基于语言的神经生物学和发展性学习障碍,其特征是不准确和不流利的单词识别,解码能力差,拼写困难。个体可以在一生中被诊断患有阅读障碍,并经历阅读障碍的症状。筛查工具,如阅读障碍成人检查表,允许个人在获得昂贵和及时的心理教育评估之前或代替评估阅读障碍的常见风险因素。尽管在网上广泛使用,阅读障碍成人检查表尚未得到验证。本研究的目的是使用单变量和多变量统计方法在有和没有阅读障碍的成年人样本中验证该清单。我们假设阅读障碍成人检查表可以准确区分自我报告诊断为阅读障碍的个体(n = 200)和对照组(n = 200),通过筛查工具的总分来衡量。我们的样本结果发现阅读障碍成人检查表有效(Cronbach's α = 0.86),可靠(灵敏度= 76%-91.5%,特异性= 80%-88%)。与最初提出的45分的临界值相比,考虑到更高的敏感性和阴性预测值,我们建议研究人员和临床医生在使用成人阅读障碍检查表时使用40分的临界值来指示可能的轻度至重度阅读障碍症状。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Dyslexia
Dyslexia Multiple-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: DYSLEXIA provides reviews and reports of research, assessment and intervention practice. In many fields of enquiry theoretical advances often occur in response to practical needs; and a central aim of the journal is to bring together researchers and practitioners in the field of dyslexia, so that each can learn from the other. Interesting developments, both theoretical and practical, are being reported in many different countries: DYSLEXIA is a forum in which a knowledge of these developments can be shared by readers in all parts of the world. The scope of the journal includes relevant aspects of Cognitive, Educational, Developmental and Clinical Psychology Child and Adult Special Education and Remedial Education Therapy and Counselling Neuroscience, Psychiatry and General Medicine The scope of the journal includes relevant aspects of: - Cognitive, Educational, Developmental and Clinical Psychology - Child and Adult Special Education and Remedial Education - Therapy and Counselling - Neuroscience, Psychiatry and General Medicine
期刊最新文献
Development and Validity of the Adult Reading History Questionnaire (ARHQ) for Chinese INSIGHT: Combining Fixation Visualisations and Residual Neural Networks for Dyslexia Classification From Eye-Tracking Data Cognitive-Linguistic Profiles Underlying Reading Difficulties Within the Unique Characteristics of Hebrew Language and Writing System The Impact of Metaphors on Academic Text Comprehension: The Case of Students With Dyslexia Validation and Reliability of the Dyslexia Adult Checklist in Screening for Dyslexia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1