Auditory evoked potentials in adolescents with autism: An investigation of brain development, intellectual impairment, and neural encoding.
Sophie Schwartz, Le Wang, Sofia Uribe and 2 others
PMID 37735966WHAT IT FOUND
Autistic adolescents' early brain responses to repeated tones were smaller and less similar to same-age peers' average responses, especially with lower nonverbal intelligence.
The pattern looked different, not simply younger.
Key findings
01Compared with same-age neurotypical adolescents, autistic adolescents had smaller peak-to-peak amplitudes in early brain responses to repeated tones.
02The overall shape of autistic adolescents' brain responses was less similar to the same-age neurotypical average shape, and amplitude alone did not explain this difference.
03Among autistic adolescents, nonverbal intelligence accounted for 15.5% of variation in waveform resemblance to the same-age neurotypical average, while age, verbal intelligence, autism severity, and trial count were not significant in the best model.
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 study did not include a comparison group with intellectual impairment or language disorder without autism, so it cannot show that the auditory brain response differences are specific to autism. The design was cross-sectional, so it cannot directly show whether the differences are developmental delays that persist or change over time. Many minimally or low verbal autistic participants could not complete the test or were excluded for too few usable trials, so the retained sample may not represent autistic adolescents with the highest support needs. Different nonverbal intelligence tests were used for different groups, and verbal intelligence was estimated with different measures, which may affect comparisons. Black and African American participants were underrepresented, and EEG cap issues with coarse or curly hair may affect generalizability. Artifact rejection used a limited set of channels and did not include hand editing or independent component analysis, so some noise may remain. The authors did not analyze latency, so timing differences were not tested.
Declared interests
The supplied text lists NIH and non-U.S. government research support. It does not state a commercial sponsor, author conflict of interest, or that a company that sells the treatment funded or wrote the study.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that autism causes atypical sound sensitivity or that auditory evoked potentials can be used in clinic now. The study had no comparison group with intellectual impairment or language disorder without autism, and the authors say further research is needed before clinical use.