ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2024
Cognitive potential of children and adolescents with CHARGE syndrome and deafblindness.
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe present study aimed to test the hypothesis stating that the cognitive potential of individuals with deafblindness is equal to those without a deafblind condition, an assumption that until now has been empirically unsubstantiated within the field of deafblindness.
methodsTo explore the assumption, 15 children and adolescents with CHARGE underwent cognitive assessment with WISC-V using a sequential two-level assessment design. The 1st level involved standardized test conditions. The 2nd level was designed as a continuation of the performances obtained from the 1st level and involved accommodations to compensate for sensory motor impairment. Statistical procedures involved the sample as a whole and when divided into two subgroups: (i) participants with CHARGE without deafblindness; (ii) participants with CHARGE and deafblindness using the 1st level scores as base line.
resultsAlthough results showed significantly lower scores in the deafblind subgroup with standardized procedures, they approximated the others after accommodating for their sensory deficits. This positive increase proved significant.
conclusionFindings supported the assumption of equal cognitive potential of individuals with and without deafblindness. Results indicated that the children and adolescents with deafblindness had most effect of the accommodations, enabling them to approximate the results of the subgroup without deafblindness. These gains were attributed enhanced accessibility endorsed by the accommodations and represented the participants latent cognitive dispositions only realized under certain circumstances.
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.