Publication:
The relationship of Asperger’s syndrome to autism: a preliminary EEG coherence study

Thumbnail Image

Open/View Files

Date

2013

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

BioMed Central
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Duffy, Frank H, Aditi Shankardass, Gloria B McAnulty, and Heidelise Als. 2013. “The relationship of Asperger’s syndrome to autism: a preliminary EEG coherence study.” BMC Medicine 11 (1): 175. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-11-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-11-175.

Research Data

Abstract

Background: It has long been debated whether Asperger’s Syndrome (ASP) should be considered part of the Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) or whether it constitutes a unique entity. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, fourth edition (DSM-IV) differentiated ASP from high functioning autism. However, the new DSM-5 umbrellas ASP within ASD, thus eliminating the ASP diagnosis. To date, no clear biomarkers have reliably distinguished ASP and ASD populations. This study uses EEG coherence, a measure of brain connectivity, to explore possible neurophysiological differences between ASP and ASD. Methods: Voluminous coherence data derived from all possible electrode pairs and frequencies were previously reduced by principal components analysis (PCA) to produce a smaller number of unbiased, data-driven coherence factors. In a previous study, these factors significantly and reliably differentiated neurotypical controls from ASD subjects by discriminant function analysis (DFA). These previous DFA rules are now applied to an ASP population to determine if ASP subjects classify as control or ASD subjects. Additionally, a new set of coherence based DFA rules are used to determine whether ASP and ASD subjects can be differentiated from each other. Results: Using prior EEG coherence based DFA rules that successfully classified subjects as either controls or ASD, 96.2% of ASP subjects are classified as ASD. However, when ASP subjects are directly compared to ASD subjects using new DFA rules, 92.3% ASP subjects are identified as separate from the ASD population. By contrast, five randomly selected subsamples of ASD subjects fail to reach significance when compared to the remaining ASD populations. When represented by the discriminant variable, both the ASD and ASD populations are normally distributed. Conclusions: Within a control-ASD dichotomy, an ASP population falls closer to ASD than controls. However, when compared directly with ASD, an ASP population is distinctly separate. The ASP population appears to constitute a neurophysiologically identifiable, normally distributed entity within the higher functioning tail of the ASD population distribution. These results must be replicated with a larger sample given their potentially immense clinical, emotional and financial implications for affected individuals, their families and their caregivers.

Description

Keywords

Asperger’s syndrome, Autism spectrum disorder, Connectivity, Discriminant function analysis, EEG, GMM, Mixture modeling, Pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified, PDD-nos, PCA, Principal components analysis, Spectral coherence

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Stories