Altered reward system reactivity for personalized circumscribed interests in autism.
Gregor Kohls, Ligia Antezana, Maya G Mosner and 2 others
PMID 29423135WHAT IT FOUND
Across the whole brain, youth with autism did not differ from controls in response to personal interests versus social approval.
A focused analysis of a reward-related brain region found greater interest response in autism, and it was related to social impairment.
Key findings
01The whole-brain test did not show group differences between youth with autism and controls when interest reward was compared with social reward.
02A focused caudate analysis showed greater activation for interest reward than social reward in youth with autism relative to controls.
03The caudate difference was related to greater social impairment and greater observed repetitive behaviours, but the authors did not correct these correlations for multiple comparisons.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The final imaging sample was smaller than the enrolled sample: 39 youth with autism were analysed after five did not attempt the scan and one was excluded. The whole-brain test of the main group comparison was null, and the caudate result came from a focused region-of-interest analysis. Several correlations were not corrected for multiple comparisons, and the authors stated that the repetitive-behaviour correlation would not survive correction. The groups were not balanced in size, with 39 youth with autism and 22 controls, although the caudate result persisted in a matched subsample. Some participants took psychoactive medications, and five youth taking psychostimulants withheld them on the study day. The autism group had a marginally lower General Conceptual Ability than controls. The social rewards were unfamiliar adults, not personalized caregivers or peers. The study did not test treatment or patient outcomes.
Declared interests
The supplied article text does not state author conflicts of interest or a funding declaration. The publication types list NIH and non-U.S. government research support.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that a caudate reward imbalance causes autism or that using a child's interests in therapy is proven effective. The main whole-brain group comparison was null, the caudate finding came from a focused secondary analysis, and the study did not test treatment.