Report of a Work Group on Nonverbal Learning Disability: Consensus Criteria for Developmental Visual-Spatial Disorder: Reconceptualizing Nonverbal Learning Disability for DSM Consideration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although extant research points to nonverbal learning disability (NVLD) as a distinct disorder, it is not included in the diagnostic nomenclatures, and there is heterogeneity in how it is defined. A working group was formed to gain consensus on a standard DSM-type definition for NVLD, a necessary first step for proposing its inclusion in future DSM editions, and the disorder was renamed to better reflect the core deficit-visual-spatial problems. METHOD: An iterative process was used to reach consensus on a DSM-style criteria set that reconceptualizes NVLD as developmental visual-spatial disorder (DVSD). This process, similar to that used during the DSM-5 revision, included working with an advisory group of NVLD experts and obtaining feedback from experts in youth psychiatric diagnosis and child and adolescent mental health practitioners. Data on stakeholder acceptance of the new name were collected from adults who self-identify as having NVLD and parents of youth with NVLD. RESULTS: During the iterative process, the criteria set shifted from syndromic, multi-area, and quantitative to single focused and more clinically oriented, conceptualizing individuals with the disorder as having persistent deficits in a single area-processing or integrating visual and spatial information. This fills a gap in the DSM system, which includes diagnoses underpinned by problems in other cognitive domains. Data indicate stakeholder acceptance of the name. CONCLUSION: A standard definition for NVLD, reconceptualized as DVSD and included in DSM, will lead to improved identification of youth with clinically significant visual-spatial deficits and associated functional impairment and improve research in the area. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Inclusion of nonverbal learning disability (NVLD) in the DSM would lead to improved identification of individuals with significant visual-spatial deficits and encourage research. Before a mental health disorder can be included in the DSM, it must be defined in a way that a wide range of clinicians can use. The authors report on a multiyear, iterative process used to formulate a behaviorally defined, clinically oriented DSM-style criteria set for NVLD, which included input from experts on NVLD and child psychiatric diagnoses and from mental health practitioners, resulting in NVLD being reconceptualized as "developmental visual spatial disorder" (DVSD). This criteria set will be included in a proposal to the DSM to include DVSD as a "condition for further study." DIVERSITY & INCLUSION STATEMENT: One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented sexual and/or gender groups in science.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.026 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".