Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32200468›Full record

SynthesisJournal of autism and developmental disorders2020

Executive Function in High-Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Meta-analysis of fMRI Studies.

Zheng Zhang, Peng Peng, Delong Zhang

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Zheng ZhangDepartment of Special Education, College of Education, The University of Texas at Austin, 1912 Speedway, Stop D5000, Austin, TX, 78712, USA. zhengzhang796@gmail.com.
Peng PengDepartment of Special Education, College of Education, The University of Texas at Austin, 1912 Speedway, Stop D5000, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Delong ZhangKey Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science of Guangdong Province, School of Psychology, Center for the Study of Applied Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Abnormalities in executive function (EF) are clinical markers for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, the neural mechanisms underlying abnormal EF in ASD remain unclear. This meta-analysis investigated the construct, abnormalities, and age-related changes of EF in ASD. Thirty-three fMRI studies of inhibition, updating, and switching in individuals with high-functioning ASD were included (n = 1114; age range 7-57 years). The results revealed that the EF construct in ASD could be unitary (i.e., common EF) in children/adolescents, but unitary and diverse (i.e., common EF and inhibition) in adults. Abnormalities in this EF construct were found across development in individuals with ASD in comparison with typically developing individuals. Implications and recommendations are discussed for EF theory and for practice in ASD.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAutism Spectrum DisorderBrainChildExecutive FunctionFemaleHumansInhibition, PsychologicalMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultAutism spectrum disorderDevelopmentExecutive functionFronto-parietal areasMeta-analysisUnity and diversity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.