Probing a neural unreliability account of auditory sensory processing atypicalities in Rett Syndrome.
Brima, T.; Beker, S.; Prinsloo, K. D.; Butler, J. S.; Djukic, A.; Freedman, E. G.; Molholm, S.; Foxe, J. J.
Show abstract
BackgroundIn the search for objective tools to quantify neural function in Rett Syndrome (RTT), which are crucial in the evaluation of therapeutic efficacy in clinical trials, recordings of sensory-perceptual functioning using event-related potential (ERP) approaches have emerged as potentially powerful tools. Considerable work points to highly anomalous auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) in RTT. However, an assumption of the typical signal-averaging method used to derive these measures is "stationarity" of the underlying responses - i.e. neural responses to each input are highly stereotyped. An alternate possibility is that responses to repeated stimuli are highly variable in RTT. If so, this will significantly impact the validity of assumptions about underlying neural dysfunction, and likely lead to overestimation of underlying neuropathology. To assess this possibility, analyses at the single-trial level assessing signal-to-noise ratios (SNR), inter-trial variability (ITV) and inter-trial phase coherence (ITPC) are necessary. MethodsAEPs were recorded to simple 100Hz tones from 18 RTT and 27 age-matched controls (Ages: 6-22 years). We applied standard AEP averaging, as well as measures of neuronal reliability at the single-trial level (i.e. SNR, ITV, ITPC). To separate signal-carrying components from non-neural noise sources, we also applied a denoising source separation (DSS) algorithm and then repeated the reliability measures. ResultsSubstantially increased ITV, lower SNRs, and reduced ITPC were observed in auditory responses of RTT participants, supporting a "neural unreliability" account. Application of the DSS technique made it clear that non-neural noise sources contribute to overestimation of the extent of processing deficits in RTT. Post-DSS, ITV measures were substantially reduced, so much so that pre-DSS ITV differences between RTT and TD populations were no longer detected. In the case of SNR and ITPC, DSS substantially improved these estimates in the RTT population, but robust differences between RTT and TD were still fully evident. ConclusionsTo accurately represent the degree of neural dysfunction in RTT using the ERP technique, a consideration of response reliability at the single-trial level is highly advised. Non-neural sources of noise lead to overestimation of the degree of pathological processing in RTT, and denoising source separation techniques during signal processing substantially ameliorate this issue.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Dichotic listening deficits in amblyaudia are characterized by aberrant neural oscillations in auditory cortex 96%
- Reliability of Mismatch Negativity Event-Related Potentials in a Multisite, Traveling Subjects Study 95%
- Atypical beta-band effects in children with dyslexia in response to rhythmic audio-visual speech 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Odd-Even Oddball Task: Evaluating Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) during Word Discrimination Compared to Speech-Token and Tone Discrimination. 96%
- Decoding age-related changes in the spatiotemporal neural processing of speech using machine learning 96%
- Amplified cortical tracking of word-level features of continuous competing speech in older adults 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Causal relationship between the right auditory cortex and speech-evoked envelope-following response: Evidence from combined tDCS and EEG 96%
- Expectations boost the reconstruction of auditory features from electrophysiological responses to noisy speech 95%
- An ecological investigation of the capacity to follow simultaneous speech and preferential detection of ones' own name 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.