ArticleMolecular autism2026
Mapping sensory sensitivity in autism.
Article in Molecular autism, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSensory perception in autism is strikingly heterogeneous, with individuals showing both hypo- and hypersensitivity across different sensory domains. While sensory differences are widely recognized as a core feature of autism, the structure and underlying patterns of this variability remain poorly understood. Previous studies have yielded mixed findings, often examining sensory processing in isolation within single domains, thereby limiting a comprehensive understanding of sensory sensitivity in autism.
methodsWe compiled psychophysical data from 107 autistic and 408 age- and IQ-matched non-autistic individuals across 32 experimental conditions spanning multiple perceptual domains, including size, brightness, orientation, pitch, and face processing. Two complementary statistical approaches were used: segmented regression and a Bayesian hierarchical model.
resultsDespite substantial inter- and intra-individual variability, both models revealed a consistent domain-specific pattern: on average, autistic individuals showed reduced sensitivity to faces and speech, while performance on basic non-social tasks was comparable to or exceeded that of the comparison group. Bayesian modelling further indicated that social relevance, rather than domain alone, accounted for the primary source of divergence between groups. LIMITATIONS: This study focused on sensory sensitivity thresholds and did not assess perceptual biases or changes in subjective appearance of the stimuli. A full account of perception in autism requires considering these broader alterations.
conclusionsThe current findings suggest that sensory differences in autism reflect a structured perceptual profile shaped by social relevance, stimulus complexity, and individual variability. The results highlight the importance of individualized sensory profiling and may inform both theoretical models and personalized approaches to intervention in autism.
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.