Revisiting Identification Thresholds of Specific Learning Disorders (SLD) in Gifted Children (GC). A Comparison of Three Groups: Twice-Exceptional (TE) Children, GC Without SLD and Non-GC With SLD
Laurent Lesecq, Laurent Querne, Julie Gornes, Laura Buffo, Louise Corbel, Loïse Perrais, Maëlys Kartner, Anne Gaelle Le Moing, Beatrice Bourdin, Patrick Berquin
{"title":"Revisiting Identification Thresholds of Specific Learning Disorders (SLD) in Gifted Children (GC). A Comparison of Three Groups: Twice-Exceptional (TE) Children, GC Without SLD and Non-GC With SLD","authors":"Laurent Lesecq, Laurent Querne, Julie Gornes, Laura Buffo, Louise Corbel, Loïse Perrais, Maëlys Kartner, Anne Gaelle Le Moing, Beatrice Bourdin, Patrick Berquin","doi":"10.1002/dys.70050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study investigates assessment of Specific Learning Disorders (SLD) in Twice-Exceptional (TE) children, gifted children (GC) who also present SLD, in oral and written language domains. Applying the standard threshold for identification (< 7th percentile) to GC often results in the assessment and identification of SLD in the TE population, thereby limiting access to appropriate support. The objective was to determine which language tests effectively identify SLD in TE children and establish optimal threshold values. The prospective study included 301 children 7–16 years, divided into three groups: GC without SLD (<i>n</i> = 71), TE children (<i>n</i> = 114), and non-gifted children with SLD (<i>n</i> = 116). Language test performances were compared across groups, and Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analyses were employed to optimize test sensitivity and specificity in the TE group. TE children performed better than the SLD group but worse than GC without disorders. At standard thresholds, text reading and spelling tests showed the highest sensitivity, which significantly improved when CART-derived decision thresholds (62nd and 38th percentiles) were applied, while maintaining satisfactory specificity. Results indicate that standard thresholds lead to under-identification of SLD in GC, and that adjusted thresholds enhance identification accuracy. These findings should generalize to similarly complex languages, such as English.</p>","PeriodicalId":47222,"journal":{"name":"Dyslexia","volume":"32 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/dys.70050","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dyslexia","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dys.70050","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study investigates assessment of Specific Learning Disorders (SLD) in Twice-Exceptional (TE) children, gifted children (GC) who also present SLD, in oral and written language domains. Applying the standard threshold for identification (< 7th percentile) to GC often results in the assessment and identification of SLD in the TE population, thereby limiting access to appropriate support. The objective was to determine which language tests effectively identify SLD in TE children and establish optimal threshold values. The prospective study included 301 children 7–16 years, divided into three groups: GC without SLD (n = 71), TE children (n = 114), and non-gifted children with SLD (n = 116). Language test performances were compared across groups, and Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analyses were employed to optimize test sensitivity and specificity in the TE group. TE children performed better than the SLD group but worse than GC without disorders. At standard thresholds, text reading and spelling tests showed the highest sensitivity, which significantly improved when CART-derived decision thresholds (62nd and 38th percentiles) were applied, while maintaining satisfactory specificity. Results indicate that standard thresholds lead to under-identification of SLD in GC, and that adjusted thresholds enhance identification accuracy. These findings should generalize to similarly complex languages, such as English.
期刊介绍:
DYSLEXIA provides reviews and reports of research, assessment and intervention practice. In many fields of enquiry theoretical advances often occur in response to practical needs; and a central aim of the journal is to bring together researchers and practitioners in the field of dyslexia, so that each can learn from the other. Interesting developments, both theoretical and practical, are being reported in many different countries: DYSLEXIA is a forum in which a knowledge of these developments can be shared by readers in all parts of the world. The scope of the journal includes relevant aspects of Cognitive, Educational, Developmental and Clinical Psychology Child and Adult Special Education and Remedial Education Therapy and Counselling Neuroscience, Psychiatry and General Medicine The scope of the journal includes relevant aspects of: - Cognitive, Educational, Developmental and Clinical Psychology - Child and Adult Special Education and Remedial Education - Therapy and Counselling - Neuroscience, Psychiatry and General Medicine