Scholarlink

<p>Reading and math difficulties are common in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but cognitive assessment cannot reliably distinguish these children from those without supposed learning disabilities and does not improve intervention outcomes. This review synthesizes evidence across five domains. Cognitive measures show 57% overlap between children with and without learning disabilities across 19 meta-analyses and 334,000 participants. Computational models demonstrate that children with math disabilities can reach typical accuracy but need 2.7 times more training. In neuroimaging, reading-related brain changes reflect slower rates of change rather than distinct processing differences. Autism-specific data show preserved developmental sequences with severity determining how long each stage takes. In, intervention research, instructional time predicts gains in at-risk samples but not mixed samples. When children with these conditions struggle academically, the barrier is instructional intensity, not a fixed ceiling. Direct assessment of foundational academic skills offers a more useful, research-supported basis for identifying problems and determining how much intervention a child needs.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Evidence Synthesis for Reconceptualizing Learning Disabilities in Children with Autism and Neurodevelopmental Conditions: a Brief Narrative Review

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月4日

查看全文
  • John Hite

摘要

Reading and math difficulties are common in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but cognitive assessment cannot reliably distinguish these children from those without supposed learning disabilities and does not improve intervention outcomes. This review synthesizes evidence across five domains. Cognitive measures show 57% overlap between children with and without learning disabilities across 19 meta-analyses and 334,000 participants. Computational models demonstrate that children with math disabilities can reach typical accuracy but need 2.7 times more training. In neuroimaging, reading-related brain changes reflect slower rates of change rather than distinct processing differences. Autism-specific data show preserved developmental sequences with severity determining how long each stage takes. In, intervention research, instructional time predicts gains in at-risk samples but not mixed samples. When children with these conditions struggle academically, the barrier is instructional intensity, not a fixed ceiling. Direct assessment of foundational academic skills offers a more useful, research-supported basis for identifying problems and determining how much intervention a child needs.