ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2014
Visuospatial processing in children with autism: no evidence for (training-resistant) abnormalities.
Article in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sex Differences in Functional Connectivity Between Resting State Brain Networks in Autism Spectrum Disorder.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2022Article
- Can dog-assisted and relaxation interventions boost spatial ability in children with and without special educational needs? A longitudinal, randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Icing on the Cake: "Amplification Effect" of Innovative Information Form in News Reports About COVID-19.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Negative geotaxis: An early age behavioral hallmark to VPA rat model of autism.Annals of neurosciences · 2019Article
- Attention Training in Autism as a Potential Approach to Improving Academic Performance: A School-Based Pilot Study.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) have been assumed to show evidence of abnormal visuospatial processing, which has been attributed to a failure to integrate local features into coherent global Gestalts and/or to a bias towards local processing. As the available data are based on baseline performance only, which does not provide insight into cognitive/neural plasticity and actual cognitive potential, we investigated how training-resistant possible visuospatial processing differences between children with and without ASD are. In particular, we studied the effect of computerized versus face-to-face visuospatial training in a group of normally intelligent children with ASD and typically developing children as control. Findings show that (a) children with and without ASD do not differ much in visuospatial processing (as assessed by a tangram-like task) and the few differences we observed were all eliminated by training; (b) training can improve visuospatial processing (equally) in both children with ASD and normally developing children; and (c) computer-based and face-to-face training was equally effective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24696376What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.