ArticleAmerican journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities2020
Development of Neural Response to Novel Sounds in Fragile X Syndrome: Potential Biomarkers.
Article in American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neonatal expression of human FMRP isoform corrects cortical deficits and improves behavior in a mouse model of fragile X syndrome.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2026Article
- Dysfunctional neural dynamics associated with sensory phenotypes in Fragile X syndrome: insights from mouse models.Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders · 2025Review
- Associations Between Altered Auditory EEG Markers and Clinical Impairments in Fragile X Syndrome.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2025Article
- Differential effects of sound repetition rate on auditory cortex development and behavior in fragile X syndrome mouse model.Experimental neurology · 2025Article
- Acute administration of NLX-101, a Serotonin 1A receptor agonist, improves auditory temporal processing during development in a mouse model of Fragile X Syndrome.Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders · 2025Article
- Specialization of the brain for language in children with Fragile X Syndrome: a functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy study.Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders · 2024Article
- Validating brain activity measures as reliable indicators of individual diagnostic group and genetically mediated sub-group membership Fragile X Syndrome.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Validating brain activity measures as reliable indicators of individual diagnostic group and genetically mediated sub-group membership Fragile X Syndrome.Research square · 2024Article
- Independent evaluation of the harvard automated processing pipeline for Electroencephalography 1.0 using multi-site EEG data from children with Fragile X Syndrome.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2022Article
- EEG as a translational biomarker and outcome measure in fragile X syndrome.Translational psychiatry · 2022Review
- Neural response to repeated auditory stimuli and its association with early language ability in male children with Fragile X syndrome.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2022Article
- Absence of the Fragile X messenger ribonucleoprotein alters response patterns to sounds in the auditory midbrain.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Looking for consistency in an uncertain world: test-retest reliability of neurophysiological and behavioral readouts in autism.Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders · 2021Article
- EEG Signal Complexity Is Reduced During Resting-State in Fragile X Syndrome.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Neural Correlates of Auditory Hypersensitivity in Fragile X Syndrome.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Auditory processing abnormalities in fragile X syndrome (FXS) may contribute to difficulties with language development, pattern identification, and contextual updating. Participants with FXS (N = 41) and controls (N = 27) underwent auditory event-related potentials during presentation of an oddball paradigm. Data was adequate for analysis for 33 participants with FXS and 27 controls (age 4-51 y, 13 females [FXS]; 4-54 y, 11 females [control]). Participants with FXS showed larger N1 and P2 amplitudes, abnormal lack of modulation of P1 and P2 amplitudes and P2 latency in response to oddball stimuli ) relative to controls: Females with FXS were more similar to controls. Participants with FXS showed a marginal speeding of the P2 latency, suggesting potentiation to oddball stimuli rather than habituation. Participants with FXS showed a heightened N1 habituation effect compared to controls. Gamma power was significantly higher for participants with FXS. Groups did not differ on mismatch negativity. Both controls and participants with FXS showed similar developmental trajectories in P1 and N1 amplitude, P2 latency, and gamma power, but not for P2 amplitude. One month retest analyses performed in 14 participants suggest strong test-retest reliability for most measures. Individuals with FXS show previously demonstrated increased response amplitude and high frequency neural activity. Despite an overall normal developmental trajectory for most measures, individuals with FXS show age-independent but gender-dependent decreases in complex processing of novel stimuli. Many markers show strong retest reliability even in children and thus are potential biomarkers for clinical trials in FXS.
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.