Similar Gap-Overlap Profiles in Children with Fragile X Syndrome and IQ-Matched Autism.
Carla A Wall, Frederick Shic, Elizabeth A Will and 2 others
PMID 38246961WHAT IT FOUND
Eye-tracking reaction times did not differ among children with autism, fragile X syndrome, or typical development.
Across trials, autism and typical groups slowed, while fragile X did not.
Key findings
01Overall reaction times did not differ by diagnosis: autism 365 ms, fragile X 372 ms, controls 377 ms.
02Reaction times were fastest for gap (333 ms), then baseline (358 ms), then overlap (429 ms).
03Reaction time increased across trials for autism and controls, but not fragile X; the change differed between autism and fragile X (p=0.0067) and between fragile X and controls (p=0.0008).
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
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 groups were compared at one time point, not followed over time, and age range varied because pandemic visits were disrupted. The sample was small for correlations, and only 10 to 13 valid trials per condition were available on average. Most children did not complete the full 84 trials, and missing trials were not modelled beyond using only valid trials. The fragile X group included children with and without autism, and the researchers did not separate those subgroups because of statistical power. The autism group was not genetically tested for other syndromes; exclusion relied on parent report and clinician judgment. Some ADHD ratings were outside the validated age range for norms, although raw scores were used. The task did not compare social conditions, so it does not address social attention. The trial-level slowing difference was a secondary finding and was not tested together with condition in a three-way model.
Declared interests
One author consults for Roche and Janssen pharmaceutical companies. The remaining authors declared no competing interests. The data came from NIH-funded longitudinal studies, grants R01MH90194 and R01MH107573.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the similar reaction times as evidence that social attention or communication is unaffected. The study did not compare social conditions, and the primary outcome was basic visual reaction time.