• Replies 9 replies
  • Subscribers 79 subscribers
  • Views 2748 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

A test for autism?

electra

I read today that researchers at Carnegie Mellon University have devised a test for autism that they say is 97% accurate. It involves giving someone am MRI scan and asking them to think about the meanings of words they are given, such as 'hug' or 'cuddle'. The posterior cingulate area of an autistic person's brain is supposed to show significantly less activity than that of an NT person when thinking about such words.

What do autistic people think of this? Is a test a good thing?

Parents
  • Former Member
    Former Member

    I misunderstood Longman's comment, I thought he was mainly talking about the UK study.

    Anyways, a comment from Oliver Robinson of UCL at the end of the NS article says:

    "Where approaches such as this hold promise is in clarifying the underlying mechanistic problems in the disorders, which we may eventually use to develop better treatments, and to get those treatments to the right people," Robinson says. However, the clinical use of such techniques is still quite a way off"

    i.e. this is about basic research rather than subjecting children or adults to tests.

    The PLOS one article makes interesting reading. It explains where their 97% figure comes from. They identified 16 out of 17 people with autism diagnoses correctly and they identified the 17 controls correctly so they count that as 33/34 success rate. I'm intrigued by how our minds are wired and/or programmed differently to non-autistic people and how this can show up on an MRI scan. Personally I don't have any problem with this research.

    (Their sample had 15 Male, 2 Female in the autistic group and 17 Male in the control group. Average age was 25, the average IQ of the autistic group closely matched the IQ of the control group.)

Reply
  • Former Member
    Former Member

    I misunderstood Longman's comment, I thought he was mainly talking about the UK study.

    Anyways, a comment from Oliver Robinson of UCL at the end of the NS article says:

    "Where approaches such as this hold promise is in clarifying the underlying mechanistic problems in the disorders, which we may eventually use to develop better treatments, and to get those treatments to the right people," Robinson says. However, the clinical use of such techniques is still quite a way off"

    i.e. this is about basic research rather than subjecting children or adults to tests.

    The PLOS one article makes interesting reading. It explains where their 97% figure comes from. They identified 16 out of 17 people with autism diagnoses correctly and they identified the 17 controls correctly so they count that as 33/34 success rate. I'm intrigued by how our minds are wired and/or programmed differently to non-autistic people and how this can show up on an MRI scan. Personally I don't have any problem with this research.

    (Their sample had 15 Male, 2 Female in the autistic group and 17 Male in the control group. Average age was 25, the average IQ of the autistic group closely matched the IQ of the control group.)

Children
No Data