Neural synchronization and intervention in pre‐readers who later on develop dyslexia

Abstract

A growing number of studies has investigated temporal processing deficits in dyslexia. These studies largely focus on neural synchronization to speech.However, the importance of rise times for neural synchronization is often overlooked. Furthermore, targeted interventions, phonics-based and auditory, are being developed, but little is known about their impact. The current study investigated the impact of a 12-week tablet-based intervention. Children at risk for dyslexia received phonics-based training, either with (n = 31) or without (n = 31) auditory training, or engaged in active control training (n = 29). Additionally, neural synchronization and processing of rise times was longitudinally investigated in children with dyslexia (n = 26) and typical readers (n = 52) from pre-reading (5 years) to beginning reading age (7 years). The three time points in the longitudinal study correspond to intervention pre-test, post-test and consolidation, approximately 1 year after completing the intervention. At each time point neural synchronization was measured to sinusoidal stimuli and pulsatile stimuli with shortened rise times at syllable (4 Hz) and phoneme rates (20 Hz). Our results revealed no impact on neural synchronization at syllable and phoneme rate of the phonics-based and auditory training. However, we did reveal atypical hemispheric specialization at both syllable and phoneme rates in children with dyslexia. This was detected even before the onset of reading acquisition, pointing towards a possible causal rather than consequential mechanism in dyslexia. This study contributes to our understanding of the temporal processing deficits underlying the

Dynamics of cognitive predictors during reading acquisition in a sample of children overrepresented for dyslexia risk

“…The sample of the current study partly overlapped with the at‐risk passive control group in the intervention study of Van Herck et al. (2023). For this reason, we applied the same criteria as Van Herck et al.…”

“…For this reason, we applied the same criteria as Van Herck et al. (2023), classifying participants as having poor literacy outcomes if they scored below the 10th percentile on at least one out of three standardized reading or spelling tasks, that is, WRF (Brus & Voeten, 1999), pseudoword reading fluency (Van den Bos et al., 1999) and spelling (Dudal, 1997), while also scoring below the 25th percentile on the other tasks. The remaining participants were classified as having typical literacy outcomes.…”

“…To investigate whether typical compared to poor literacy outcomes influenced the predictive patterns in our model of interest, we classified the participants in two groups based on their third grade literacy scores. The sample of the current study partly overlapped with the at-risk passive control group in the intervention study ofVan Herck et al (2023). For this reason, we applied the same criteria asVan Herck et al (2023), classifying participants as having poor literacy outcomes if they scored below the 10th percentile on at least one out of three standardized reading or spelling tasks, that is, WRF(Brus & Voeten, 1999), pseudoword reading fluency(Van den Bos et al, 1999)…”

The Time Lag in Local Field Potential Signals for the Development of its Bayesian Belief Network

“…Studies have emphasized the importance of neural synchrony in various cognitive processes such as attention, memory, and sensory processing [17]. Abnormal synchronization patterns have been linked to neuropsychiatric conditions like schizophrenia and epilepsy, highlighting the importance of comprehending the principles that control brain network synchronization [18,19]. Understanding the mechanisms that cause synchronization between different brain regions is essential for uncovering the intricacies of brain function and treating neurological and psychiatric disorders.…”