Prevalence of Dyslexia 

Context in source publication

Context 1

... Score Key appropriate for the child’s age was then used to work out the above test s cores into normed scores. The normed scores enabled the calculation of the ‘At Risk Quotient’ for each subtest and the overall ‘At Risk Quotient’ as summarized in Table 2.2 below. An ARQ of 0.9 or greater is a strong evidence of being dyslexic while an ARQ of 0.6 – 0.8 indicate mild evidence of dyslexia. From this data, 3 children were found not to be dyslexic as they had an ARQ of <0.6 while 4 children had an ARQ of between 0.6 and 0.8 indicating that they were mildly dyslexic. 5 children were found to be dyslexic having an ARQ of more than 0.9. Thus the 108 children Not At Risk for dyslexia plus 3 children who were At Risk but found not to be dyslexic by the DST-J test gave a total of 111 (93%) children who were not dyslexic as shown by the pie chart in Fig 2. The 4.16% (n= 5) who exhibited strong evidence of being dyslexic and 3.33% (n=4) who showed mild evidence puts the prevalence of dyslexia at 7.49 %. In the 3 attainment subtests of the DST-J; One-Minute Reading, Two-Minute Spelling, and One Minute Writing, the dyslexic children performed better in the spelling test with only 3 children performing poorly. The dyslexic children however showed marked impairment in the reading subtest with 8 out of 12 children being at risk/performing poorly as shown in the Table 3.1 below. There was a correlation between At risk for dyslexia and reading (r = 0.042) and At risk for dyslexia and spelling (r= 0.028). In the diagnostic tests, the dyslexics performed better in Bead threading, Semantic fluency and Verbal fluency tasks with few or no children being at risk. They were however significantly impaired in phonemic segmentation (91.6%, n=11), ...