| Literature DB >> 36248649 |
Moana Beyer1, Johanna Liebig1,2, Teresa Sylvester1,2, Mario Braun3, Hauke R Heekeren2,4, Eva Froehlich5, Arthur M Jacobs1,2, Johannes C Ziegler6.
Abstract
When children learn to read, their neural system undergoes major changes to become responsive to print. There seem to be nuanced interindividual differences in the neurostructural anatomy of regions that later become integral parts of the reading network. These differences might affect literacy acquisition and, in some cases, might result in developmental disorders like dyslexia. Consequently, the main objective of this longitudinal study was to investigate those interindividual differences in gray matter morphology that might facilitate or hamper future reading acquisition. We used a machine learning approach to examine to what extent gray matter macrostructural features and cognitive-linguistic skills measured before formal literacy teaching could predict literacy 2 years later. Forty-two native German-speaking children underwent T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and psychometric testing at the end of kindergarten. They were tested again 2 years later to assess their literacy skills. A leave-one-out cross-validated machine-learning regression approach was applied to identify the best predictors of future literacy based on cognitive-linguistic preliterate behavioral skills and cortical measures in a priori selected areas of the future reading network. With surprisingly high accuracy, future literacy was predicted, predominantly based on gray matter volume in the left occipito-temporal cortex and local gyrification in the left insular, inferior frontal, and supramarginal gyri. Furthermore, phonological awareness significantly predicted future literacy. In sum, the results indicate that the brain morphology of the large-scale reading network at a preliterate age can predict how well children learn to read.Entities:
Keywords: MRI; children; machine learning; precursors; prediction; reading acquisition
Year: 2022 PMID: 36248649 PMCID: PMC9558903 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2022.920150
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurosci ISSN: 1662-453X Impact factor: 5.152
Demographic and psychometric information of the final pediatric sample before (TP1) and after literacy acquisition (TP2).
| Descriptive data | Test | Raw scores (mean ± SD) | Range of raw scores | Percentile ranks (mean ± SD) |
|
| ||||
| Age at TP1 | 5.58 ± 0.48 | 5.01–6.09 | ||
| Age at TP2 | 8.25 ± 0.53 | 7.41–8.92 | ||
| Female/male | 24/18 | |||
| Family history of dyslexia | 7 | |||
| Right-handed/left-handed | 38/4 | |||
| Monolingual/bilingual | 37/5 | |||
| Non-verbal intelligence at TP1 | CPM | 23.26 ± 5.37 | 13–35 | |
| Non-verbal intelligence at TP2 | WISC | 115.48 ± 12.71 | 90–147 | |
| Dyslexia at TP2 | 10 | |||
|
| ||||
| Rapid naming | BISC | 14.81 ± 3.79 | 5–20 | n.a. |
| Phonological awareness | BISC | 36.17 ± 3.41 | 24–40 | n.a. |
|
| ||||
| Reading fluency | SLRT-II | 36.76 ± 15.69 | 6–71 | 52.95 ± 34.52 lp |
| Reading comprehension | ELFE 1-6 | 54.00 ± 22.71 | 6–90 | 49.49 ± 32.14 |
| Spelling accuracy | DERET 1-2 + | 17.36 ± 11.56 | 1–50 | 40.24 ± 30.74 |
| Literacy ability | SLRT-II, ELFE 1-6, DERET 1-2 + | 0.00 ± 0.98 | −2.60 to 1.84 | n.a. |
Dyslexia was defined as performance below the 16th percentile rank of the reference population in either spelling accuracy or real word reading fluency or in both based on Kuhl et al.’s (2020) classification criteria. CPM, Colored Progressive Matrices; WISC, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children; BISC, Bielefelder Screening zur Früherkennung von Lese-Rechtschreibschwierigkeiten; SLRT-II, Salzburger Lese- und Rechtschreibtest; ELFE 1-6, Ein Leseverständnistest für Erst- bis Sechstklässler; DERET 1-2+, Deutscher Rechtschreibtest für das erste und zweite Schuljahr; n.a., age-standardized scores are not available for subtests and literacy ability overall; lp, percentile lower boundary; hp, percentile higher boundary.
FIGURE 1Representation of the nested k-fold cross-validation framework.
FIGURE 2Predicted literacy ability from leave-one-out cross-validated (LOOCV) elastic net regression model. Scatterplots depict the observed literacy ability (y-axis) by predicted literacy skills (x-axis). The black line represents the line of identity; the gray line is the regression line of literacy ability on predicted literacy, with the shaded area representing a 95% pointwise confidence interval.
Tuned hyperparameters and selected non-zero coefficients of the leave-one-out (LOO-) and 10-fold cross-validated (CV) elastic net regressions.
| Alpha (mean ± SD) | Lambda (mean ± SD) | Number of non-zero coefficients (mode, range) | |
| LOOCV | 0.853 ± 0.328 | 0.012 ± 0.006 | 20, 16–27 |
| 10-fold CV | 0.658 ± 0.392 | 0.022 ± 0.016 | 19, 13–27 |
The count of regression variables does not include the model’s intercept. Twenty-eight variables were entered into the model. SD, standard deviation.
The top ten prediction variables of literacy ability (mean coefficient >0.15) based on the leave-one-out (LOO) and 10-fold cross-validated (CV) elastic net linear regressions.
| Rank | Selection frequency (LOOCV) | Mean coefficient | Gray matter feature or psychometric variable | Region of the left hemisphere | |
| LOOCV | 10-fold CV | ||||
| 1 | 76.19% | 0.71 | 0.61 | Local gyrification | Insular cortex |
| 2 | 71.43% | 0.69 | 0.59 | Cortical volume | Fusiform gyrus |
| 3 | 71.43% | −0.50 | −0.43 | Local gyrification | Supramarginal gyrus |
| 4 | 64.29% | −0.47 | −0.43 | Cortical volume | Inferior temporal gyrus |
| 5 | 57.14% | −0.40 | −0.33 | Local gyrification | Inferior frontal gyrus |
| 6 | 59.52% | 0.41 | 0.41 | Phonological awareness | |
| 7 | 76.19% | −0.24 | −0.24 | Surface area | Inferior temporal gyrus |
| 8 | 61.90% | 0.21 | 0.19 | Cortical volume | Middle temporal gyrus |
| 9 | 38.10% | 0.18 | 0.18 | Rapid naming | |
| 10 | 35.71% | 0.18 | 0.15 | Local gyrification | Middle temporal gyrus |
Predictors are listed according to their average rank. The rank displays the variable importance as defined by caret (Kuhn, 2015), i.e., how much unique variance of the response variable can be explained by this variable. Compared to the mean correlation coefficient, this metric is more stable against outlier models. The selection frequency shows how often the variable was chosen at this rank for the LOOCV regression. All prediction variables were standardized before being entered into the model.
FIGURE 3Visualization of the primary features collected at the end of kindergarten predicting literacy ability measured at the end of the second grade. Features with the greatest contribution to the prediction of literacy ability are coded purple and red. The regions are depicted on the left pial surface of the FreeSurfer template based on the Desikan-Killiany atlas (Desikan et al., 2006). Literacy ability is defined as the summary score of reading fluency, reading comprehension and spelling accuracy, measured with the Salzburger Lese- und Rechtschreibtest, Ein Leseverständnistest für Erst- bis Sechstklässler, and Deutscher Rechtschreibtest für das erste und zweite Schuljahr, respectively.
Model performance of the leave-one-out (LOO-) and 10-fold cross-validated (CV) elastic net regressions.
| RMSE | MAE |
|
| |
| LOOCV | 0.575 | 0.459 | 0.652 | 0.807 |
| 10-fold CV | 0.579 | 0.438 | 0.646 | 0.804 |
R, coefficient of determination; RMSE, root mean squared error; MAE, mean absolute error.