Somatosensory Regions Show Limited Functional Connectivity Differences in Youth with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An estimated 70-90% of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have sensory symptoms, which may present as hyper- or hyporesponsivity in one or more sensory modalities. These sensitivities correlate with social symptoms, activity, and social interaction levels. Interestingly, sensory symptoms appear to be most prevalent in late childhood, suggesting a developmental component. Although the neural basis of sensory sensitivities remains unclear, atypical functional connectivity of sensory brain regions has been suggested as a potential mechanism. Tactile sensitivities are among the most predictive of social functioning, yet no studies to our knowledge have examined somatosensory functional connectivity in children and adolescents with ASD, when symptoms are typically most prominent. In this study, we used human data from the Autism Brain Imaging Data Exchange (ABIDE-I) to assess functional connectivity differences of somatosensory regions during resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging, in youth aged 8-15 years. After head motion exclusion, our sample included 67 participants with ASD and 121 typically developing controls. We additionally examined associations between functional connectivity and age, as well as ASD symptom severity. Together, these seed-based analyses showed limited differences in functional connectivity between groups, either to hypothesized target regions or in terms of global connectivity. Our findings suggest that hyper- or hyposomatosensory functional connectivity at rest is not a population-level feature in ASD. However, this does not preclude increased variability of somatosensory networks across the ASD population. Furthermore, as sensory sensitivities were not specifically assessed in this sample, future studies may be better able to identify patterns of functional connectivity, reflecting individual differences in sensory symptoms.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".