Developed in concert with the Learning Disabilities Association of America (LDA), this White Paper regarding specific learning disabilities identification and intervention represents the expert consensus of 58 accomplished scholars in education, psychology, medicine, and the law. Survey responses and empirical evidence suggest that five conclusions are warranted: 1) The SLD definition should be maintained and the statutory requirements in SLD identification procedures should be strengthened; 2) neither ability-achievement discrepancy analysis nor failure to respond to intervention alone is sufficient for SLD identification; 3) a “third method” approach that identifies a pattern of psychological processing strengths and weaknesses, and achievement deficits consistent with this pattern of processing weaknesses, makes the most empirical and clinical sense; 4) an empirically-validated RTI model could be used to prevent learning problems, but comprehensive evaluations should occur for SLD identification purposes, and children with SLD need individualized interventions based on specific learning needs, not merely more intense interventions; and 5) assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological processes should be used for both SLD identification and intervention purposes.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

We screened 50 neonates fulfilling the inclusion criteria admitted during the study period in a teaching hospital in a north-eastern state of India. Out of 50 neonates screened, 22 (44%) developed retinopathy of prematurity. There was significant association between the birth weight and gestational age of the baby at the time of the delivery with the development of ROP. Multivariate analysis of risk factors for development of ROP using a stepwise method, after controlling for various potential confounders, showed that apnea was a significant risk factor for the development of retinopathy of prematurity.