Neural responses to syllable-induced P1m and social impairment in children with autism spectrum disorder and typically developing Peers

PLoS One. 2024 Mar 8;19(3):e0298020. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298020. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

In previous magnetoencephalography (MEG) studies, children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have been shown to respond differently to speech stimuli than typically developing (TD) children. Quantitative evaluation of this difference in responsiveness may support early diagnosis and intervention for ASD. The objective of this research is to investigate the relationship between syllable-induced P1m and social impairment in children with ASD and TD children. We analyzed 49 children with ASD aged 40-92 months and age-matched 26 TD children. We evaluated their social impairment by means of the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) and their intelligence ability using the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC). Multiple regression analysis with SRS score as the dependent variable and syllable-induced P1m latency or intensity and intelligence ability as explanatory variables revealed that SRS score was associated with syllable-induced P1m latency in the left hemisphere only in the TD group and not in the ASD group. A second finding was that increased leftward-lateralization of intensity was correlated with higher SRS scores only in the ASD group. These results provide valuable insights but also highlight the intricate nature of neural mechanisms and their relationship with autistic traits.

MeSH terms

  • Autism Spectrum Disorder* / diagnosis
  • Child
  • Humans
  • Intelligence / physiology
  • Intelligence Tests
  • Magnetoencephalography
  • Peer Group

Grants and funding

This study was supported by the Center of Innovation Program of the Japan Science and Technology Agency, JST, JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 20H04993 and 19K02952. This research was partially supported by grants from the Moonshot Research and Development Program (grant number JPMJMS2297) of Japan Science and Technology. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.