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

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Dyslexia
Published
2026-10-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.70050
Primary Topic
Reading and Literacy Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Patrick C. Berquin, Laurent Lesecq, Laurent Querné, Laura Buffo et al.
Dyslexia
Reading and Literacy Development
article

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

Patrick C. Berquin, Laurent Lesecq, Laurent Querné, Laura Buffo, Béatrice Bourdin, Julie Gornes, Louise Corbel, A.G. Le Moing, Loïse Perrais, Maëlys Kartner
article en

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.

DyslexiaVol. 32(4)
Université Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier (FR), Inserm (FR), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Amiens-Picardie (FR), Université de Picardie Jules Verne (FR)
Reduced inequalities, Quality education, Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Reading and Literacy Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.