Skip to main content
. 2020 Jan 10;10:2841. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02841

TABLE 6.

Percentages and number of individuals in reading difficulty (RD) groups identified with the use of a single cut-off.

Group Subgroup Simulation without measurement error (group %) Simulation with measurement error (group %)
Persistent RCa → RC 1.92 (27) 1.57 (22)
RC → RFb 0.54 (8) 0.73 (10)
RC → RF + RC 0.47 (7) 0.44 (6)
RF → RC 0.33 (5) 0.54 (8)
RF → RF 2.93 (42) 2.56 (37)
RF → RF + RC 0.68 (10) 0.61 (9)
RF + RC → RC 0.36 (5) 0.35 (5)
RF + RC → RF 1.28 (18) 1.02 (15)
RF + RC → RF + RC 1.42 (20) 0.79 (11)
Persistent total 9.93 (142) 8.61 (123)
Late emerging no RDc → RC 4.38 (63) 5.10 (73)
no RD → RF 2.23 (32) 3.26 (47)
no RD → RF + RC 0.44 (6) 0.60 (9)
Late-emerging total 7.05 (101) 8.96 (129)
Resolving RC → no RD 3.50 (50) 4.38 (63)
RF → no RD 2.48 (36) 3.41 (49)
RF + RC → no RD 0.52 (8) 0.73 (10)
Resolving total 6.50 (94) 8.52 (122)
no RD no RD 76.52(1,095) 73.92(1,058)

aRC, reading comprehension, bRF, reading fluency, cno RD, no reading difficulties. The number in parentheses shows the number of individuals based on the percentage for N = 1,432. On the left side of the arrow is the RD status in grade 2 [only reading fluency difficulties (RF), only reading comprehension difficulties (RC), both reading fluency and reading comprehension difficulties (RF + RC), or no reading difficulties (no RD)]. On the right side of the arrow is the RD status in grade 6. Reading fluency and/or reading comprehension difficulties were calculated using the lowest 10%.