Executive functions in children with specific learning disorders: Shedding light on a complex profile through teleassessment.

Capodieci et al. (2023) gave four short web games to kids with specific learning disorders. They also tested kids without learning problems of the same age. The whole test happened on a laptop at home, so no one had to travel.

The games measured core executive functions: working memory, shifting, inhibition, and planning. Each task took only a few minutes and used colorful pictures.

Children with learning disorders scored lower on every game. The gaps were large enough that a teacher could see the difference without fancy math.

Slow processing speed explained part of the problem. When kids took longer to notice the pictures, their EF scores dropped even more.

Ceruti et al. (2025) looked at the same age group but used in-person tests. They found that different learning sub-types show different EF weaknesses. Agnese’s web tasks give the big picture; Claudia’s follow-up shows where to drill down.

Danielsson et al. (2012) saw a mixed EF picture in kids with intellectual disability: some skills OK, some weak. Agnese’s SLD group looked globally weak on the web tasks. The difference is the comparison group: Henrik used mental-age matches, Agnese used same-grade peers.

Sakash et al. (2018) also found wide EF problems in school-age kids with cerebral palsy. The pattern supports the idea that any neurodevelopmental diagnosis should trigger an EF check, whether the child walks into clinic or logs in from home.

You can screen EF remotely and still get clear separation between kids with and without SLD. That means quicker referrals, shorter wait lists, and data you can share with teachers the same day. If a child struggles with reading or math, add a five-minute web EF battery before you write the intervention plan. Target working memory and processing speed first; they may unlock the academic gains you want.