Temporal and Fronto-Central Auditory Evoked Responses in Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Scoping Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the cortical level, the central auditory neural system (CANS) includes primary and secondary areas. So far, much research has focused on recording fronto-central auditory evoked potentials/responses (P1-N1-P2), originating mainly from the primary auditory areas, to explore the neural processing in the auditory cortex. However, less is known about the secondary auditory areas. This review aimed to investigate and compare fronto-central and T-complex responses in populations at risk of auditory dysfunction, such as individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders. After searching the electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid), ten studies encompassing six neurodevelopmental disorders were included for the analysis. All experimental populations had atypical T-complexes, manifesting as an absence of evoked responses, shorter latency, and/or smaller amplitude. Moreover, in two experimental groups, dyslexia and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), abnormal T-complex responses were observed despite the presence of normal fronto-central responses. The presence of abnormal T-complex responses in combination with normal fronto-central responses in the same population, using the same experiment, may highlight the advantage of the T-complex for indexing deficits in distinct auditory processes or regions, which the fronto-central response may not track.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it