La identificación del riesgo de trastorno del aprendizaje de la lectura (dislexia) en 2.° curso de educación infantil

Q3 Nursing
Gerardo Aguado Alonso , Juan Cruz Ripoll Salceda
{"title":"La identificación del riesgo de trastorno del aprendizaje de la lectura (dislexia) en 2.° curso de educación infantil","authors":"Gerardo Aguado Alonso ,&nbsp;Juan Cruz Ripoll Salceda","doi":"10.1016/j.rlfa.2023.100316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To check the predictive efficacy of subsequent reading difficulties of the Test for the early detection of difficulties in learning to read and write and the Battery for initiation to reading (BIL<!--> <!-->3-6).</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Both instruments were applied to students in the 2nd year of Preschool (107 participants for the Early Detection Test and 209 for the BIL<!--> <!-->3-6), and 2 years later their reading was evaluated by reading Words and Pseudowords of the Prolec-R and Text IB of the TALE. An assessment of the participants’ learning was also obtained from the teachers.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The sensitivity (S) and specificity (E) of both instruments were calculated based on the groupings of the students based on the results in the 3 reading tasks: good and poor readers from pc<!--> <!-->16. Neither of the two instruments examined reach appropriate values of S and E. If an appropriate value of S is taken a priori to ensure that students at risk of difficulties are identified, then the E is very low, and therefore the number of false positives makes it impossible successful educational decisions. The general assessment of the teaching staff on the learning of each participant shows a similar predictive capacity as both instruments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56174,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Logopedia, Foniatria y Audiologia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Logopedia, Foniatria y Audiologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0214460323000189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To check the predictive efficacy of subsequent reading difficulties of the Test for the early detection of difficulties in learning to read and write and the Battery for initiation to reading (BIL 3-6).

Method

Both instruments were applied to students in the 2nd year of Preschool (107 participants for the Early Detection Test and 209 for the BIL 3-6), and 2 years later their reading was evaluated by reading Words and Pseudowords of the Prolec-R and Text IB of the TALE. An assessment of the participants’ learning was also obtained from the teachers.

Results

The sensitivity (S) and specificity (E) of both instruments were calculated based on the groupings of the students based on the results in the 3 reading tasks: good and poor readers from pc 16. Neither of the two instruments examined reach appropriate values of S and E. If an appropriate value of S is taken a priori to ensure that students at risk of difficulties are identified, then the E is very low, and therefore the number of false positives makes it impossible successful educational decisions. The general assessment of the teaching staff on the learning of each participant shows a similar predictive capacity as both instruments.

2年级儿童阅读学习障碍(阅读障碍)的风险识别
目的检验早期发现读写学习困难测试和开始阅读电池(BIL 3-6)对后续阅读困难的预测效果。方法将这两种工具应用于学前二年级的学生(107名参加早期检测测试,209名参加比尔3-6测试),两年后通过阅读Prolec-R的单词和伪单词以及TALE的文本IB来评估他们的阅读。还从教师那里获得了对参与者学习情况的评估。结果两种仪器的灵敏度(S)和特异性(E)是根据学生在3项阅读任务中的结果分组计算的:来自pc 16的好读者和差读者。所检查的两种工具都没有达到适当的S和E值。如果事先采用适当的S值来确保识别出有困难风险的学生,那么E值非常低,因此误报的数量使教育决策不可能成功。对教职员工对每位参与者学习情况的总体评估显示,这两种工具的预测能力相似。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信