Science Behind Logifera - Logifera
Evidence-Informed

The Science Behind
Logifera's Screeners

Our dyslexia and dyscalculia screening tools are informed by decades of peer-reviewed research, clinical best practices, and professional guidelines — but they are not a substitute for a formal diagnosis.

A Foundation of Rigorous Research

Logifera is not built on intuition alone — it draws heavily on established science. Our questions, scoring logic, and interpretive frameworks are derived from validated studies and clinical consensus. We are transparent that our tool is a screener, not a diagnostic instrument, and we encourage users to seek professional evaluation for any concerns.

Peer-Reviewed Studies

Our screening items and reference data are inspired by findings from peer-reviewed journals in psychology, neuroscience, and education.

Clinical Guidelines

We look to the diagnostic criteria and recommendations of major professional bodies, such as the DSM‑5 and ICD‑11, to shape our framework — though we are not affiliated with or endorsed by these organizations.

Statistical Validation

Our algorithms are continuously tested against diverse data sets to improve reliability and fairness, but we do not claim clinical validity for diagnostic purposes.

Key Research References

Core Literature
Reintroducing dyslexia: Early identification and implications for pediatric practice
Sanfilippo J, Ness M, Petscher Y, Rappaport L, Zuckerman B, Gaab N. (2020). Pediatrics, 146(1), e20193046.
doi:10.1542/peds.2019-3046
The diagnosis and treatment of dyscalculia
Haberstroh S, Schulte-Körne G. (2019). Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 116(7), 107.
doi:10.3238/arztebl.2019.0107
Severe developmental dyscalculia is characterized by core deficits in both symbolic and nonsymbolic number sense.
Decarli G, Sella F, Lanfranchi S, Gerotto G, Gerola S, Cossu G, Zorzi M. (2023). Psychological Science, 34(1), 8-21.
doi:10.1177/09567976221097947
The diagnosis and management of dyscalculia
Kaufmann L, von Aster M. (2012). Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 109(45), 767.
doi:10.3238/arztebl.2012.0767
Forty years of reading intervention research for elementary students with or at risk for dyslexia: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.
Hall C, Dahl‐Leonard K, Cho E, Solari EJ, Capin P, Conner CL, Henry AR, Cook L, Hayes L, Vargas I, Richmond CL. (2023). Reading Research Quarterly., 58(2), 285-312.
doi:10.1002/rrq.477

These references are provided for informational purposes and do not imply endorsement of Logifera by the authors or publishers.


Professional Guidelines & Consensus

Standards

DSM‑5 Criteria

Our screener is inspired by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) criteria for Specific Learning Disorders, particularly the specifiers for impairment in reading and mathematics. We use these criteria as a conceptual guide, but we do not claim to replicate or replace a clinical diagnosis.

ICD‑11 Guidelines

The International Classification of Diseases (11th revision) informs our thinking about symptom clusters and functional impact. Our questions are designed to reflect similar domains, but we are not a diagnostic tool.

IDA Knowledge and Practice Standards

We incorporate principles from the International Dyslexia Association standards for screening and assessment, with a focus on evidence-informed practice. Our approach is influenced by these standards but is not formally accredited by IDA.

NICE Quality Standards

Our development process takes cues from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence quality standards for identifying and managing specific learning disabilities. We aim to follow best practices, but we are not NICE‑accredited.

References to DSM‑5, ICD‑11, IDA, and NICE are for informational purposes only. Logifera is an independent screener and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or certified by these organizations.


From Research to Practice

🔍

Item Generation

Question content, wording, and response options are derived from validated instruments and academic literature, adapted for a screening context.

📊

Scoring & Norms

Scores are interpreted using available normative data and statistical methods (e.g., ROC curves) to help identify potential risk, but these are not diagnostic thresholds.

🔄

Continuous Refinement

We regularly review new research and user feedback to improve our screener, always with the understanding that it is a starting point, not a conclusion.

Have questions about our research?

Our team is happy to discuss the science behind Logifera. Reach out to us anytime.

Contact Our Team

Logifera is a screening tool, not a diagnostic device. Always consult a qualified professional for a formal evaluation.