The Reckoning
- May 29
- 1 min read
When the marketing claims of dyslexia intervention programs are held against rigorous evidence standards, the picture is sobering. A new systematic review of 10 widely cited programs:
5–10% of children meet criteria for dyslexia. 15–20% have clinically significant reading difficulties. Globally: ~150–200 million children. This is a public health issue.
The finding: ZERO of the 10 programs reviewed achieves "high certainty" of evidence under GRADE standards across foundational reading outcomes.
The Orton-Gillingham meta-analysis (Stevens et al., 2021): pooled effect on foundational skills g = 0.22, p = .40. NOT statistically significant. The OG brand ≠ evidence.
Wilson Reading System: massive market reach in U.S. schools. What Works Clearinghouse: ZERO studies meeting evidence standards.
Stronger evidence (Moderate GRADE) lives with LiPS and Equipped for Reading Success — programs with less commercial visibility.
Implementation matters more than brand. Same program, different fidelity = opposite outcomes. Practitioner quality may be the single biggest moderator.
Action for families: Demand diagnostic clarity. Verify practitioner training. Commit to 6-week + 6-month progress monitoring. Brand is not evidence.
Action for researchers and policymakers: Independent trials. Active-comparator designs. Cross-linguistic studies. A public evidence registry.
Every month of delay is a month a child cannot get back. Check out the research: Read between the lines at NeuroNavigation.org/Research. #Dyslexia #ScienceOfReading
Comments