The brain basis of handwriting deficits in Chinese children with developmental dyslexia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abundant behavioral studies have demonstrated high comorbidity of reading and handwriting difficulties in developmental dyslexia (DD), a neurological condition characterized by unexpectedly low reading ability despite adequate nonverbal intelligence and typical schooling. The neural correlates of handwriting deficits remain largely unknown; however, as well as the extent that handwriting deficits share common neural bases with reading deficits in DD. The present work used functional magnetic resonance imaging to examine brain activity during handwriting and reading tasks in Chinese dyslexic children (n = 18) and age-matched controls (n = 23). Compared to controls, dyslexic children exhibited reduced activation during handwriting tasks in brain regions supporting sensory-motor processing (including supplementary motor area and postcentral gyrus) and visual-orthography processing (including bilateral precuneus and right cuneus). Among these regions, the left supplementary motor area and the right precuneus also showed a trend of reduced activation during reading tasks in dyslexics. Moreover, increased activation was found in the left inferior frontal gyrus and anterior cingulate cortex in dyslexics, which may reflect more efforts of executive control to compensate for the impairments of motor and visual-orthographic processing. Finally, dyslexic children exhibited aberrant functional connectivity among brain areas for cognitive control and sensory-motor processes during handwriting tasks. Together, these findings suggest that handwriting deficits in DD are associated with functional abnormalities of multiple brain regions implicated in motor execution, visual-orthographic processing, and cognitive control, providing important implications for the diagnosis and treatment of dyslexia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".