Methods used by psychologists for identifying dyslexia: A systematic review.

Inconsistencies in the operationalisation of dyslexia in assessment practices are concerning. Variations in different countries' education contexts and education-related legislation could contribute to continuing discrepancies between psychologists' assessment practices. However, an international "snapshot" of these practices is unavailable. An international comparison of psychologists' dyslexia assessment practices could help ascertain whether there are contextual factors that can foster converging practices. Accordingly, this study systematically reviewed the literature to capture how psychologists identify and/or diagnose dyslexia across English-speaking countries. Quantitative and/or qualitative studies, published between 2013 and 2021, that investigated psychologists' self-reported methods for assessing, identifying, and/or diagnosing individuals with dyslexia were included. Eleven studies (published across fourteen papers) met the inclusion criteria. Most included studies sampled school psychologists who work in the USA. Psychologists' dyslexia assessment practices were diverse (including the use of cognitive discrepancy and response-to-intervention methods). The results highlight an international need to develop a consensus operational definition of dyslexia and universal assessment guidelines. Future research might investigate the practices and beliefs of psychologists who work outside of the USA, and to be inclusive of adult populations. Implications for research and training are explored.

Diagnosing adults with dyslexia: Psychologists' experiences and practices.

Previous research has investigated how psychologists identify dyslexia in school-aged children. However, it is presently unclear how psychologists diagnose dyslexia in adults. This study aimed to explore psychologists' understandings and experiences in how they assess adults for dyslexia. Nine psychologists in Australia were recruited from professional associations and interviewed using a semi-structured schedule. After member checks, transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. The results suggested that participants' assessment practices with adults were similar to those used with children. However, participants were not confident in assessing adults due to a lack of an empirical base and training, and appropriately normed tools. Moreover, participants relied on their clinical judgment to help overcome barriers unique to the assessment of adults including obtaining an accurate developmental history and determining the relevancy of academic intervention for a formal diagnosis. Participants recommended (better) training and accessible research about how to efficaciously diagnose adults with dyslexia. The robustness of current diagnostic tools for equitably identifying adults with dyslexia was questioned by some participants. There is a need for national guidelines in Australia to support psychologists in identifying adults with dyslexia. International research and guidelines have an important role to play in informing this process.