Victoria Zakopoulou1*, Maria Boukouvala2, Nikos Tziakis2, Panagiotis Vellis3, Pavlos Christodoulides1, George Dimakopoulos1, Dimitrios Sarris4, Maria Vergou4, Pilios-Dimitris Stavrou5, Vasiliki Koutsobina6, Periklis Tagkas7 and Venetsanos Mavreas8
1Department of Speech and Language Therapy, Laboratory of New Approaches in Communication Disorders, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Epirus, Greece
2Child Guidance Center of University Hospital of Ioannina, Ioannina, Epirus, Greece
3ELEPAP, Rehabilitation Center, Ioannina, Epirus, Greece
4Department of Preschool Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Epirus, Greece
5Laboratory of Clinical Psychology, Psychopathology and Psychoanalysis (PCPP), University Paris Descartes – Sorbonne, Paris, France
6Department of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Epirus, Greece
7Department of Translation and Interpreting, University of Ioannina, Igoumenitsa, Epirus, Greece
8School of Medicine, Psychiatric Clinic of University Hospital of Ioannina, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Epirus, Greece
*Corresponding Author: Victoria Zakopoulou, Laboratory of New Approaches in Communication Disorders, Department of Speech and Language Therapy, University of Ioannina, Greece.
Received: December 26, 2020; Published: January 28, 2021
Background: The development of individualized diagnostic profiles of children ‘at risk’ of Specific Learning Disorder (SLD) and the implementation of a well-suited to individual’s specific needs intervention program, could be of high significance for the early investigation of SLD.
Materials and Methods: We assessed twenty children 5.4 to 6.0 years old aiming to the accomplishment of the following key-milestones: (a) implementation of an adequate cluster of diagnostic procedures, (b) formulation of individualized diagnostic profiles ‘at risk’ of SLD, and (c) implementation of intervention program, tailored to the individual’s profile.
Results: According to the results, early extent of weaknesses was determined in the domains of working memory (p = .010), visuo-spatial abilities (p = .028), and phonological awareness (p < .001).
Conclusions: Consequently, three profiles ‘at risk’ of SLD emerged in a multifaceted complexity, indicating weaknesses in the above domains. A well-structured 8-month early intervention program resulted in high improvement of the intervention group’s progress (p=.001).
Keywords: Specific Learning Disorder; Early Individualized Diagnosis and Intervention; Working Memory; Phonological Awareness; Visuo-spatial Abilities
Citation: Victoria Zakopoulou., et al. “Children ‘at Risk’ of Specific Learning Disorder: Individualized Diagnostic Profiles and Interventions”. Acta Scientific Neurology 4.2 (2021): 25-41.
Copyright: © 2021 Victoria Zakopoulou., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.