ArticlePloS one2016
A Novel Analog Reasoning Paradigm: New Insights in Intellectually Disabled Patients.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05577754 (A Phase II Double-blind Multi-center, Placebo-controlled Trial, to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Alpelisib), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
A Phase II Double-blind Multi-center, Placebo-controlled Trial, to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Alpelisib (BYL719) in Pediatric and Adult Patients With Megalencephaly-CApillary Malformation Polymicrogyria Syndrome (MCAP)
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Drug development for neurodevelopmental disorders: lessons learned from fragile X syndrome.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2018Review
- Reasoning Abilities and Potential Correlates Among Jordanian School Children.Maternal and child health journal · 2018Article
- Basal ganglia involvement inNeuroImage. Clinical · 2018Article
- Altered fronto-striatal functions in the Gdi1-null mouse model of X-linked Intellectual Disability.Neuroscience · 2017Article
- Prerequisite Skills in Cognitive Testing: Innovations in theory and recommendations for practice.Cognitive developmentArticle
- Framework for assessing individuals with rare genetic disorders associated with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD): the example of Phelan McDermid Syndrome.The Clinical neuropsychologistReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntellectual Disability (ID) is characterized by deficits in intellectual functions such as reasoning, problem-solving, planning, abstract thinking, judgment, and learning. As new avenues are emerging for treatment of genetically determined ID (such as Down's syndrome or Fragile X syndrome), it is necessary to identify objective reliable and sensitive outcome measures for use in clinical trials.
objectiveWe developed a novel visual analogical reasoning paradigm, inspired by the Progressive Raven's Matrices, but appropriate for Intellectually Disabled patients. This new paradigm assesses reasoning and inhibition abilities in ID patients.
methodsWe performed behavioural analyses for this task (with a reaction time and error rate analysis, Study 1) in 96 healthy controls (adults and typically developed children older than 4) and 41 genetically determined ID patients (Fragile X syndrome, Down syndrome and ARX mutated patients). In order to establish and quantify the cognitive strategies used to solve the task, we also performed an eye-tracking analysis (Study 2).
resultsDown syndrome, ARX and Fragile X patients were significantly slower and made significantly more errors than chronological age-matched healthy controls. The effect of inhibition on error rate was greater than the matrix complexity effect in ID patients, opposite to findings in adult healthy controls. Interestingly, ID patients were more impaired by inhibition than mental age-matched healthy controls, but not by the matrix complexity. Eye-tracking analysis made it possible to identify the strategy used by the participants to solve the task. Adult healthy controls used a matrix-based strategy, whereas ID patients used a response-based strategy. Furthermore, etiologic-specific reasoning differences were evidenced between ID patients groups.
conclusionWe suggest that this paradigm, appropriate for ID patients and developmental populations as well as adult healthy controls, provides an objective and quantitative assessment of visual analogical reasoning and cognitive inhibition, enabling testing for the effect of pharmacological or behavioural intervention in these specific populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.