Neuroplasicity and the developmental dyslexia intervention
- Authors: Dorofeeva S.V.1
-
Affiliations:
- National Research University “Higher School of Economics”
- Issue: Vol 18, No 4 (2023)
- Pages: 706-709
- Section: Conference proceedings
- URL: https://genescells.ru/2313-1829/article/view/623418
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/gc623418
- ID: 623418
Cite item
Open Access
Access granted
Subscription or Fee Access
Abstract
A growing body of literature suggests that timing plays a critical role in neuroplasticity processes and the molecular mechanisms necessary for learning and memory [1, 2]. Of particular significance to remedial education is identifying the time parameters for primary stimulation that are necessary and sufficient, the time frame relevant for transitioning to long-term memory, and the appropriate periods for restimulation. The translation of short-term stimulation into long-term memory is regulated by diverse processes that are mechanistically distinct and activated by synaptic activity [1], while also relying on protein and glycoprotein synthesis [3] and myelination processes.
The current research explores the potential benefits of incorporating neuroscience research on the timing of neuroplasticity mechanisms in designing intervention programs for individuals with developmental dyslexia, specifically focusing on enhancing cognitive functions and skills crucial for reading. Based on available evidence, we have determined optimal training and break time periods for a 10-year-old child with developmental dyslexia resulting from multiple deficits.
During the 21-day intervention program, 12 training sessions were conducted each day, commencing at 8 or 9 am and held hourly thereafter. Each session comprised a brief, targeted training exercise ranging from 3 to 7 minutes, depending on the child’s aptitude, followed by a playing session or computer game lasting up to 15 minutes. A 40-minute break followed each session. Brief training sessions were required due to the swift exhaustion of the subject child. The sessions were selected based on the evidence that brief stimulation can still result in a high level of CERB phosphorylation, even if it lasts only a few minutes [4]. Playing sessions were necessary for supporting the child’s motivation throughout the lengthy and intensive intervention program, and the activities performed during these sessions were pertinent to developing specific skills. The duration of the breaks was determined by evidence indicating the time required for primary memory consolidation processes and protein synthesis necessary for long-lasting synaptic plasticity. We have made an effort to eliminate any potential sources of emotional engagement or significant new information during breaks, allowing the initial stage of memory consolidation to occur without any unnecessary disruption. During the training sessions, various tasks were used to target specific types of processing such as phonological, visual, speech, and multimodal processing (e.g., visual-motor, audio-visual, or reading). Each session exclusively focused on one type of exercise. In our prior study [5], we discussed the linguistic aspects of the program and the exercises employed.
Significant progress was achieved as a result of the 21-day intervention, surpassing the progress achieved in three years of schooling and during traditional remediation programs with speech therapists that lasted 1–3 sessions per week for 40–120 minutes. Following the intensive intervention, supportive training was continued for one year while considering the crucial timing for neuroplasticity. Afterward, the child reached a normative level of reading, and the effect was maintained throughout their entire period of school education. Based on the timing of neuroplasticity processes, this is the first intensive intervention program experience for dyslexia that we are aware of.
Intensive remediation programs, based on relevant findings regarding the mechanisms of memory consolidation, may enhance neural memory trace reinforcement. However, further research is necessary to optimize the timing and length of sessions and identify the most effective combination of linguistic and neurophysiological aspects for intervention.
Full Text
A growing body of literature suggests that timing plays a critical role in neuroplasticity processes and the molecular mechanisms necessary for learning and memory [1, 2]. Of particular significance to remedial education is identifying the time parameters for primary stimulation that are necessary and sufficient, the time frame relevant for transitioning to long-term memory, and the appropriate periods for restimulation. The translation of short-term stimulation into long-term memory is regulated by diverse processes that are mechanistically distinct and activated by synaptic activity [1], while also relying on protein and glycoprotein synthesis [3] and myelination processes.
The current research explores the potential benefits of incorporating neuroscience research on the timing of neuroplasticity mechanisms in designing intervention programs for individuals with developmental dyslexia, specifically focusing on enhancing cognitive functions and skills crucial for reading. Based on available evidence, we have determined optimal training and break time periods for a 10-year-old child with developmental dyslexia resulting from multiple deficits.
During the 21-day intervention program, 12 training sessions were conducted each day, commencing at 8 or 9 am and held hourly thereafter. Each session comprised a brief, targeted training exercise ranging from 3 to 7 minutes, depending on the child’s aptitude, followed by a playing session or computer game lasting up to 15 minutes. A 40-minute break followed each session. Brief training sessions were required due to the swift exhaustion of the subject child. The sessions were selected based on the evidence that brief stimulation can still result in a high level of CERB phosphorylation, even if it lasts only a few minutes [4]. Playing sessions were necessary for supporting the child’s motivation throughout the lengthy and intensive intervention program, and the activities performed during these sessions were pertinent to developing specific skills. The duration of the breaks was determined by evidence indicating the time required for primary memory consolidation processes and protein synthesis necessary for long-lasting synaptic plasticity. We have made an effort to eliminate any potential sources of emotional engagement or significant new information during breaks, allowing the initial stage of memory consolidation to occur without any unnecessary disruption. During the training sessions, various tasks were used to target specific types of processing such as phonological, visual, speech, and multimodal processing (e.g., visual-motor, audio-visual, or reading). Each session exclusively focused on one type of exercise. In our prior study [5], we discussed the linguistic aspects of the program and the exercises employed.
Significant progress was achieved as a result of the 21-day intervention, surpassing the progress achieved in three years of schooling and during traditional remediation programs with speech therapists that lasted 1–3 sessions per week for 40–120 minutes. Following the intensive intervention, supportive training was continued for one year while considering the crucial timing for neuroplasticity. Afterward, the child reached a normative level of reading, and the effect was maintained throughout their entire period of school education. Based on the timing of neuroplasticity processes, this is the first intensive intervention program experience for dyslexia that we are aware of.
Intensive remediation programs, based on relevant findings regarding the mechanisms of memory consolidation, may enhance neural memory trace reinforcement. However, further research is necessary to optimize the timing and length of sessions and identify the most effective combination of linguistic and neurophysiological aspects for intervention.
About the authors
S. V. Dorofeeva
National Research University “Higher School of Economics”
Author for correspondence.
Email: sdorofeeva@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Moscow
References
- Park P, Volianskis A, Sanderson TM, et al. NMDA receptor-dependent long-term potentiation comprises a family of temporally overlapping forms of synaptic plasticity that are induced by different patterns of stimulation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2013;369(1633):20130131. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0131
- Park A, Jacob AD, Walters BJ, et al. A time-dependent role for the transcription factor CREB in neuronal allocation to an engram underlying a fear memory revealed using a novel in vivo optogenetic tool to modulate CREB function. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2020;45(6):916–924. doi: 10.1038/s41386-019-0588-0
- Tiunova AA, Anokhin KV, Rose SP. Two critical periods of protein and glycoprotein synthesis in memory consolidation for visual categorization learning in chicks. Learning & Memory. 1998;4(5):401–410. doi: 10.1101/lm.4.5.401
- Fields RD, Eshete F, Stevens B, Itoh K. Action potential-dependent regulation of gene expression: Temporal specificity in Ca++, CREB, and MAP kinase signaling. The Journal of Neuroscience. 1997;17(19):7252–7266. doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.17-19-07252.1997
- Dorofeeva SV. Lingvisticheskie aspekty korrekcii disleksii i disgrafii: Opyt uspeshnogo primeneniya kompleksnogo podhoda. Voprosy psiholingvistiki. 2017;3(33):184–201. (In Russ).
Supplementary files
