Reduced GABA and altered somatosensory function in children with autism spectrum disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Abnormal responses to tactile stimuli are a common feature of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Several lines of evidence suggest that GABAergic function, which has a crucial role in tactile processing, is altered in ASD. In this study, we determine whether in vivo GABA levels are altered in children with ASD, and whether alterations in GABA levels are associated with abnormal tactile function in these children. METHODS: GABA-edited magnetic resonance spectroscopy was acquired in 37 children with Autism and 35 typically developing children (TDC) from voxels over primary sensorimotor and occipital cortices. Children performed tactile tasks previously shown to be altered in ASD, linked to inhibitory mechanisms. Detection threshold was measured with- and without the presence of a slowly increasing sub-threshold stimulus. Amplitude discrimination was measured with- and without the presence of an adapting stimulus, and frequency discrimination was measured. RESULTS: Sensorimotor GABA levels were significantly reduced in children with autism compared to healthy controls. Occipital GABA levels were normal. Sensorimotor GABA levels correlated with dynamic detection threshold as well as with the effect of sub-threshold stimulation. Sensorimotor GABA levels also correlated with amplitude discrimination after adaptation (an effect absent in autism) and frequency discrimination in controls, but not in children with autism. CONCLUSIONS: GABA levels correlate with behavioral measures of inhibition. Children with autism have reduced GABA, associated with abnormalities in tactile performance. We show here that altered in vivo GABA levels might predict abnormal tactile information processing in ASD and that the GABA system may be a future target for therapies. Autism Res 2016. © 2016 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".