Assessing the reading comprehension of adults with learning disabilities.

Harrington et al. (2006) checked if two short tests can spot reading level in adults with mild or borderline learning disabilities.

They gave the TROG-visual and WORD Reading Comprehension to the adults in day centers. Each person took the tests twice, two weeks apart.

Both tests scored about the same on both days. TROG-visual earned a reliability score of 0.88 and WORD earned 0.91. Those numbers are high enough for clinic use.

The tests also matched the adults’ known reading ages. This means they give a true picture of who can read what.

Enkelaar et al. (2013) later showed the same idea works for balance. They proved simple clinical gait tests are reliable for older adults with ID, just like these reading tests are for literacy.

Koegel et al. (1992) did the same job for social smarts in teens. Their seven tests held up across raters and time, foreshadowing the solid repeat scores seen here.

Smith et al. (2010) and Vassos et al. (2023) both repeat the pattern: short questionnaires work well in adults with ID when you check them carefully. Together these papers build a rule—well-built brief tools can be trusted across domains.

You can give TROG-visual or WORD in under 15 minutes and get a reading age. Match that age to your consent forms, social stories, or medication handouts so clients truly understand what they sign or read. No extra gear, no long reports—just quick data that holds up.