title: A critique of claims from Reynolds, Nicolson & Hambly (2003) that DDAT is an effective treatment for children with reading difficulties--'lies, damned lies and (inappropriate) statistics'?
abstract: Reynolds, Nicolson and Hambly (Dyslexia 2003; 9: 48) report a study to evaluate the effectiveness of dyslexia dyspraxia attention deficit treatment (DDAT)-an exercise-based treatment for children with reading difficulties. They claim that DDAT is an effective treatment with positive effects on the cognitive skills underlying literacy and the reading process. We outline the numerous methodological and statistical problems with this study and conclude that it provides no evidence that DDAT is an effective form of treatment for children with reading difficulties.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of York, York, Hestington, United Kingdom. m.snowling@psych.york.ac.uk
authors.forename: Margaret J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Snowling
authors.forename: Charles
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Hulme
mesh_terms: D002648:Child; D003071:Cognition; D004410:Dyslexia / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000628:therapy*; D006801:Humans; D013223:Statistics as Topic / Q000379:methods