Differentiating the neural response to intervention in children with developmental dyslexia

Abstract

Developmental dyslexia is associated with functional abnormalities within reading areas of the brain. For some children diagnosed with dyslexia, phonologically based remediation programs appear to rehabilitate brain function in key reading areas (Shaywitz et al., Biological Psychiatry 55: 101-110, 2004; Simos et al., Neuroscience 58: 1203-1213, 2002). However, a non-trivial number of children diagnosed with dyslexia fail to respond to these interventions (Torgesen, Learning Disabilities Research & Practice 15: 55-64, 2000). A cross-sectional fMRI study investigating post-treatment effects was conducted in an effort to better understand differences in brain function between treatment responders and non-responders. Educational testing and brain activation measured after treatment suggested that the reading intervention used in the present study rehabilitated several basic level reading processes in all participants diagnosed with dyslexia. However, activation in the left inferior parietal lobe differentiated treatment responders and non-responders in comparison to non-impaired readers. Children with persistent deficits in single word decoding (treatment non-responders) demonstrated significantly less activation in the left inferior parietal lobe when compared to non-impaired readers.

Desempenho De Escolares Com Dislexia: Programas De Intervenção Metalinguístico E De Leitura

“…Assim, os programas de intervenção utilizados neste estudo, com enfoque fonológico, em leitura ou fonológico associado à leitura, abordaram atenção, discriminação e memória auditiva de forma direta em todas as sessões, tanto pela especificidade da tarefa quanto pela leitura em voz alta. Isso favoreceu o desenvolvimento da atenção à fonologia da língua portuguesa, conforme descrito em estudos nacionais e internacionais Kipp & Mohr, 2008;Silva & Capellini, 2010;O'Shaughnessy & Swanson, 2000;Odegard, Ring, Smith, Biggan & Black, 2008;Torgensen, Wagner, Rashotte & Lindamood, 2010;Wagner, Torgensen & Rashotte, 1994).…”

“…: sílabas, morfemas, rimas), tornando mais eficiente o acesso e a construção de representações ortográficas Kipp & Mohr, 2008;Odegard, Ring, Smith, Biggan & Black, 2008;O'Shaughnessy & Swanson, 2000;Silva & Capellini, 2010;Torgesen, Rashotte, Herron & Lindamood, 2010;Wagner, Torgensen & Rashotte, 1994).…”

Socioeconomic Status and Reading Disability: Neuroanatomy and Plasticity in Response to Intervention

“…Several prior studies have reported functional brain differences between individuals with RD who did or did not respond to intervention at either a single pre-intervention (Odegard et al 2008;Davis et al 2011;Farris et al 2011;Molfese et al 2013) or post-intervention time point (Rezaie et al 2011a(Rezaie et al , 2011b, although few have reported longitudinal neural changes. One study using magnetic source imaging (MSI) found that responders, but not non-responders, exhibited increased duration of activity and a shift in activation timing in a broad left temporoparietal region during a phonological decoding task, such that their neural profiles matched typical readers post-intervention (Simos et al 2007).…”

Advances in neurocognitive rehabilitation research from 1992 to 2017: The ascension of neural plasticity.

“…These populations represent a small sample of problems that fMRI has been used to study. For example, improved performance accompanied by left-hemisphere activity increases have been documented for developmental speech and language disorders such as stuttering and dyslexia (Neumann et al, 2005; Odegard, Ring, Smith, Biggan, & Black, 2008). Research with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) has indicated that fMRI may be useful for predicting post-surgical outcomes and non-invasively lateralizing language dominance prior to surgery in children and adults with refractory seizures (Rabin et al, 2004; Suarez et al, 2014).…”