Structural brain correlates of poor reading comprehension

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Poor comprehenders have typical word reading skill and intelligence but poorer than expected reading comprehension. While the prevalence of poor comprehenders is similar to that of poor decoders (individuals who have difficulty fluently converting written text into spoken language), less is known about the neurobiological substrates of poor comprehension. Extant studies have found small differences in grey matter volume between poor comprehenders and poor or typically reading peers. However, a detailed quantification of cortical morphometric features and white matter integrity remains unexplored. Data from 2,100 children (1,200 with imaging data), aged 8-16 were analyzed to determine if there is a distinct neuroanatomy associated with poor reading comprehension. We computed grey matter volume, cortical thickness, and surface area, and white matter measures including mean diffusivity, fractional anisotropy, neurite orientation, and neurite density for poor comprehenders and compared to that of poor decoders and typical readers. Results: revealed small but widespread white matter differences, but no grey matter differences between poor comprehenders and other readers. Poor comprehenders showed decreased white matter integrity (increased mean diffusivity, decreased neurite density) in tracts previously associated with reading, including the Superior Longitudinal Fasciculus and Inferior Longitudinal Fasciculus, and in tracts that have been associated with cognitive performance such as the Uncinate Fasciculus. These results suggest that diffuse structural connectivity differences may underlie reading comprehension weaknesses in the face of intact decoding skills. This is consistent with the behavioral profile of poor comprehenders who exhibit a broad pattern of subclinical impairments in language and integrative cognitive processes.
Full text 1,945 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 2 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Poor comprehenders have typical word reading skill and intelligence but poorer than expected reading comprehension. While the prevalence of poor comprehenders is similar to that of poor decoders (individuals who have difficulty fluently converting written text into spoken language), less is known about the neurobiological substrates of poor comprehension. Extant studies have found small differences in grey matter volume between poor comprehenders and poor or typically reading peers. However, a detailed quantification of cortical morphometric features and white matter integrity remains unexplored. Data from 2,100 children (1,200 with imaging data), aged 8-16 were analyzed to determine if there is a distinct neuroanatomy associated with poor reading comprehension. We computed grey matter volume, cortical thickness, and surface area, and white matter measures including mean diffusivity, fractional anisotropy, neurite orientation, and neurite density for poor comprehenders and compared to that of poor decoders and typical readers.

Results

revealed small but widespread white matter differences, but no grey matter differences between poor comprehenders and other readers. Poor comprehenders showed decreased white matter integrity (increased mean diffusivity, decreased neurite density) in tracts previously associated with reading, including the Superior Longitudinal Fasciculus and Inferior Longitudinal Fasciculus, and in tracts that have been associated with cognitive performance such as the Uncinate Fasciculus. These results suggest that diffuse structural connectivity differences may underlie reading comprehension weaknesses in the face of intact decoding skills. This is consistent with the behavioral profile of poor comprehenders who exhibit a broad pattern of subclinical impairments in language and integrative cognitive processes. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-06-02T02:00:03.124865+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0