SLPOtherMolecular autism2019

Delayed M50/M100 evoked response component latency in minimally verbal/nonverbal children who have autism spectrum disorder.

Timothy P L Roberts, Junko Matsuzaki, Lisa Blaskey and 6 others

PMID 31428297

WHAT IT FOUND

Children with autism who have few or no words showed delayed brain responses to simple tones compared to typically developing peers.

The delay was linked to poorer communication skills, suggesting these neural measures could help track language ability.

Key findings

01Minimally verbal/nonverbal children with autism showed significantly delayed M50 and M100 auditory response latencies compared to typically developing children.

02Longer auditory response latencies were associated with poorer communication skills as measured by the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales.

03The MEG-PLAN protocol enabled the inclusion of minimally verbal children in neuroimaging, a group typically excluded from such studies.

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.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study is cross-sectional, so it cannot show whether these neural delays cause language difficulties or result from them. The minimally verbal group was small (n=16), and some children in this group could not participate, potentially biasing the sample toward higher-functioning individuals. The link between nonverbal IQ and communication skills was strong, making it difficult to completely separate the effects of cognitive ability from language ability in the statistical models.

Declared interests

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. No other conflicts of interest were declared.

The easy way to misread this

Do not use these MEG findings to diagnose or treat individual patients. The study identifies a group-level biological pattern, not a clinical test. The association with communication skills does not prove that the neural delay causes the language impairment.

Read it on PubMed →