Consensus Without Clarity for Dyslexia Identification: A Commentary on Holden et al.

Holden et al. (2025) conducted a Delphi study to establish consensus on how to define, identify, and assess dyslexia, with the definitional component primarily reported by Carroll et al. (2025). Although Holden et al. aim to provide guidance for practitioners, we have concerns about the study's methodology, the reinforcement of IQ testing and discrepancy‐based approaches, a focus on cognitive processing difficulties, and an over‐reliance on clinical judgement. We argue that their approach ultimately complicates rather than clarifies dyslexia assessment and introduces barriers to equitable identification and intervention. Instead, we advocate for an approach that prioritises direct evaluation of word reading accuracy and fluency difficulties, eliminating reliance on cognitive assessments, family history, and response to instruction as diagnostic criteria.