Reevaluating the Dyslexia Adult Checklist: Is Its Definition Too Strict?

The neurobiological learning disorder dyslexia affects an estimated 15% of the population, yet accurately diagnosing it remains complex, often requiring extensive, costly assessments. To help individuals self-assess their risk, online screening tools like the Dyslexia Adult Checklist have become popular. Developed by the British Dyslexia Association, this checklist is among the most widely used globally. Recently, a study published in the journal Dyslexia has validated the effectiveness of this tool, confirming that it is both reliable and indicative of dyslexia. Interestingly, researchers from Concordia University suggest that the current threshold for screening might be set too high, potentially missing individuals with mild dyslexia.

The study involved 400 participants, evenly split between those who self-identified as dyslexic and those who did not. Participants completed the 15-question checklist either online or on paper, with questions designed to evaluate literacy, language, and organizational skills. Examples include inquiries about confusing similar words, losing track of reading lines, and difficulties pronouncing certain words. Responses are scored on a four-point Likert scale, with higher scores indicating more prominent dyslexic traits. Traditionally, scores of 45 or above suggest mild dyslexia, while scores of 60 indicate moderate to severe dyslexia.

Analysis showed that the checklist accurately distinguished between individuals with and without dyslexia, with those self-reporting dyslexia scoring significantly higher. However, the researchers noted that the original cutoff score of 45 was not based on strong clinical evidence. They recommend lowering this threshold to 40 to better identify those with mild dyslexia, which could facilitate earlier support and interventions.

Validating this screening tool can significantly streamline the process of identifying adults who may need formal dyslexia assessments. This is crucial because comprehensive evaluations can be lengthy and expensive, potentially delaying critical support. By adopting a more sensitive cutoff, healthcare providers and individuals can more effectively recognize dyslexia’s impact on education and employment, leading to timely assistance.

Zoey Stark, the study's lead author, emphasizes that while dyslexia is often studied in children, understanding its effect on adults is equally important. She highlights that this validated checklist offers a practical first step toward intervention, helping adults access tailored resources faster. Other contributors to the research include Ph.D. candidates and former postdoctoral fellows dedicated to improving neurodivergence tools.

In summary, this research underscores the importance of continuous validation of screening tools to ensure they accurately reflect the conditions they aim to identify. A more refined cutoff score could improve early detection, support quality, and ultimately, the quality of life for many adults with dyslexia.