Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28834327›Full record

ArticleAutism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research2017

Reading comprehension of ambiguous sentences by school-age children with autism spectrum disorder.

Meghan M Davidson, Susan Ellis Weismer

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06116552 (More and Less Social Comprehension), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06116552 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

More and Less Social Comprehension: Child and Text Factors for Autistic Children

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Kansas Medical CenterRan2023 to 2025Enrolled50ConditionsAutism Spectrum DisorderArmsMore Social Stories, Less Social Stories
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Brief report: Autistic students read between lines.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2024
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Meghan M DavidsonDepartment of Communication Sciences & Disorders and the Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1500 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53706.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1239-1072
Susan Ellis WeismerSchool of Behavioral and Brain Sciences and Callier Center for Communication Disorders (current affiliation), The University of Texas at Dallas, 1966 Inwood Road, Dallas, TX, 75235.

Funding

Waisman Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Research Center Down Syndrome RegistryU54HD090256 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI CHANG, QIANG · 2016 to 2020
$6.0M
Executive Function in Children with Typical and Atypical Language AbilitiesR01DC011750 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI ELLIS-WEISMER, SUSAN, KAUSHANSKAYA, MARGARITA · 2012 to 2016
$2.7M
NICHD NIH HHS U54 HD090256NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC011750
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Weak central coherence (processing details over gist), poor oral language abilities, poor suppression, semantic interference, and poor comprehension monitoring have all been implicated to affect reading comprehension in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This study viewed the contributions of different supporting skills as a collective set of skills necessary for context integration-a multi-component view-to examine individual differences in reading comprehension in school-age children (8-14 years) with ASD (n = 23) and typically developing control peers (n = 23). Participants completed a written ambiguous sentence comprehension task in which participants had to integrate context to determine the correct homonym meaning via picture selection. Both comprehension products (i.e., offline representations after reading) and processes (i.e., online processing during reading) were evaluated. Results indicated that children with ASD, similar to their TD peers, integrated the context to access the correct homonym meanings while reading. However, after reading the sentences, when participants were asked to select the meanings, both groups experienced semantic interference between the two meanings. This semantic interference hindered the children with ASD's sentence representation to a greater degree than their peers. Individual differences in age/development, word recognition, vocabulary breadth (i.e., number of words in the lexicon), and vocabulary depth (i.e., knowledge of the homonym meanings) contributed to sentence comprehension in both children with ASD and their peers. Together, this evidence supports a multi-component view, and that helping children with ASD develop vocabulary depth may have cascading effects on their reading comprehension. Autism Res 2017, 10: 2002-2022. © 2017 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: Like their peers, children with ASD were able to integrate context, or link words while reading sentences with ambiguous words (words with two meanings). After reading the sentences, both groups found it hard to pick the correct meaning of the ambiguous sentence and this decision was more difficult for the participants with ASD. Older children, children with better word reading abilities, and children with higher vocabularies were better at understanding ambiguous sentences. Helping children with ASD to develop richer vocabularies could be important for improving their reading comprehension.

Indexed as

ReadingAdolescentAutism Spectrum DisorderChildComprehensionFemaleHumansLearningMaleSemanticsVocabularyASDcomprehensioneye trackingoral languagereadingsemanticsweak central coherence

Identifiers

PMID28834327
PMCPMC5735033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.