Autism in Norwegian Criminal Justice

Despite the high prevalence of sensory processing difficulties in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), little research has focused on the sex differences in sensory processing. Furthermore, there is a lack of knowledge on the female‐specific symptoms of ASD, contributing to later referral, diagnosis and intervention. In this study, we examined the sex differences in sensory processing symptoms in large cohorts of ASD children (N = 168; 26 females, 142 males) and typically developing (TD) children (N = 439; 209 females, 230 males). For this, we translated the sensory processing measure (SPM) and SPM – Preschool (SPM‐P) Home Forms to French. The SPM/SPM‐P are parent/caregiver questionnaires that assess typical behavioral responses to sensory stimuli. Overall, our results showed that the magnitude of the differences in sensory processing between males and females is larger in ASD children relative to TD children, with females showing more severe symptoms in Hearing, as well as Balance and Motion subscales. Additionally, linear discriminant analysis showed that the SPM/SPM‐P are good at discriminating TD children from ASD, children with higher accuracy rates for females than for males. These findings are discussed in light of the heterogeneity of sensory processing difficulties present in ASD. Overall, our results suggest that there seem to be female‐specific profiles in sensory processing difficulties in ASD. Implications of findings concerning sex differences in sensory processing and their potential for improving identification and diagnosis of ASD females are discussed.Lay SummaryThe present study examined sex differences in behavioral responses to sensory stimuli in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and typically developing (TD) children. While there is a small trend for TD males to show more sensory processing atypicalities, female ASD children show significantly more atypical responses compared to their male counterparts. This has important implications for characterizing female autism profiles, and ultimately improving the chance for earlier detection, diagnosis and treatment.

There is emerging empirical evidence indicating that differences in self-reported sensory processing may be associated with differences in levels of stress in the adult populations. Understanding how sensory processing relates to stress is of clinical relevance, given the well-established impact of stress on physical health, mental health and well-being. Although several studies have examined the association between sensory processing and stress in adult populations, no published reviews have systematically summarised and synthesised these findings. We aimed to fill this gap by conducting a systematic review to synthesise the available evidence examining the association between self-reported sensory processing and self-reported measures of stress in the adult population. The review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-S) checklist. Twenty studies were included in the final review. Quality assessment was conducted with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Overall, the evidence is strong for an association between differences in sensory processing and self-reported stress in adults. This association was found across a range of populations and measures of stress, in cross-sectional studies. The most commonly used measure of sensory processing was the Highly Sensitive Person Scale, which was consistently moderately associated with a range of measures of stress. The quality of the included studies was generally good, with most meeting four or five out of five criteria. Longitudinal studies are lacking. There is strong evidence for a cross-sectional association between sensory processing and stress in an adult population. Further research, in particular longitudinal studies and studies including clinical populations, would be of benefit in order to establish causality.

A recent large-scale (N = 245) cross-sectional study of threshold sensitivity and temporal processing in hearing, vision and touch for adults ranging in age from 18 through 82 years of age questioned the long-presumed link between aging and declines in cognitive-processing [Humes, L.E., Busey, T.A., Craig, J. & Kewley-Port, D. (2013). Attention, Perception and Psychophysics, 75, 508–524]. The results of this extensive psychophysical investigation suggested that individual differences in sensory processing across multiple tasks and senses drive individual differences in cognitive processing in adults regardless of age. My long-time colleague at IU, Diane Kewley-Port, was instrumental in the design, execution and interpretation of results for this large study, especially for the measures of auditory temporal processing. The methods used and the results obtained in this study will be reviewed, with a special emphasis on the auditory stimuli and tasks involved. The potential implications of these findings, including possible interventions, will also be discussed. Finally, future research designed to better evaluate the direction of the association between sensory-processing and cognitive-processing deficits will be described. [Work supported, in part, by research grant R01 AG008293 from the NIA.]

It is not known why some patients with underlying chronic nociceptive sources in the neck develop cervicogenic headache (CEH) and why others do not. This quantitative sensory testing (QST) study systematically explores the differences in sensory pain processing in 17 CEH patients with underlying chronic cervical zygapophysial joint pain compared to 10 patients with chronic cervical zygapophysial joint pain but without CEH. The QST protocol comprises pressure pain threshold testing, thermal detection threshold testing, electrical pain threshold testing and measurement of descending inhibitory modulation using the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm. The main difference between patients with or without CEH was the lateralization of pressure hyperalgesia to the painful side of the head of CEH patients, accompanied by cold as well as warm relative hyperesthesia on the painful side of the head and neck. From this hypothesis-generating study, our results suggest that rostral neuraxial spread of central sensitization, probably to the trigeminal spinal nucleus, plays a major role in the development of CEH.

Current evidence suggests that an enhanced right ear advantage (REA) in dichotic listening (DL) among older adults may originate from age-related structural changes in the corpus callosum and age-related decline in cognitive processes. Less is known about the effect of information processing at lower portions of the auditory system on DL performance. The present study investigates whether interaural differences (ID) in sensory processing at lower levels of the auditory system are associated with the magnitude of the REA in DL among older adults. Sixty-eight older adults participated in the study. Participants were assessed with a DL test using nonforced (NF) and forced attention paradigms. Hearing sensitivity, transient-evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE), contralateral suppression of TEOAE, a proxy measure of medial olivocochlear activation, and auditory brainstem response to speech stimuli (speech-ABR) were tested in both ears separately. The ID in sensory processing at lower levels of the auditory system was derived by calculating the difference between the RE and LE for each auditory measure. Bivariate and multivariate regression models were performed. One multivariate model for each DL paradigm (NF and forced attention) was independently constructed. Measures of cognitive speed of processing and cognitive flexibility were accounted for in the regression models. For both multivariate regression models, ID in pure-tone thresholds and ID in MOC suppression of TEOAE were significantly associated with the magnitude of the REA for DL among older adults. Cognitive measures of speed of processing and cognitive flexibility also contributed to the magnitude of the REA. These results suggest that ID in sensory processing at lower levels of the auditory system account, at least in part, for the increased magnitude of the REA in DL among older adults.

Organisms filter the complexity of natural stimuli through their individual sensory and perceptual systems. Such perceptual filtering is particularly important for social stimuli. A shared "social umwelt" allows individuals to respond appropriately to the expected diversity of cues and signals during social interactions. In this way, the behavioral and neurobiological mechanisms of sociality and social bonding cannot be disentangled from perceptual mechanisms and sensory processing. While a degree of embeddedness between social and sensory processes is clear, our dominant theoretical frameworks favor treating the social and sensory processes as distinct. An integrated social-sensory framework has the potential to greatly expand our understanding of the mechanisms underlying individual variation in social bonding and sociality more broadly. Here we leverage what is known about sensory processing and pair bonding in two common study systems with significant species differences in their umwelt (rodent chemosensation and avian acoustic communication). We primarily highlight that (1) communication is essential for pair bond formation and maintenance, (2) the neural circuits underlying perception, communication and social bonding are integrated, and (3) candidate neuromodulatory mechanisms that regulate pair bonding also impact communication and perception. Finally, we propose approaches and frameworks that more fully integrate sensory processing, communication, and social bonding across levels of analysis: behavioral, neurobiological, and genomic. This perspective raises two key questions: (1) how is social bonding shaped by differences in sensory processing?, and (2) to what extent is sensory processing and the saliency of signals shaped by social interactions and emerging relationships?

Sensory processing (i.e., the manner in which the nervous system receives, modulates, integrates, and organizes sensory stimuli) is critical when humans are deciding how to react to environmental demands. Although behavioral studies have shown that there are stable individual differences in sensory processing, the neural substrates that implement such differences remain unknown. To investigate this issue, structural magnetic resonance imaging scans were acquired from 51 healthy adults and individual differences in sensory processing were assessed using the Sensory Profile questionnaire (Brown et al.: Am J Occup Ther 55 (2001) 75-82). There were positive relationships between the Sensory Profile modality-specific subscales and gray matter volumes in the primary or secondary sensory areas for the visual, auditory, touch, and taste/smell modalities. Thus, the present results suggest that individual differences in sensory processing are implemented by the early sensory regions. Hum Brain Mapp 38:6206-6217, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Patients initially diagnosed as ‘warm’ or ‘cold’ CRPS 1 show differences in central sensory processing some eight years after diagnosis: a quantitative sensory testing study

Sensory processing differences and urinary incontinence in school-aged children

Differences in sensory processing are a core feature of autism spectrum disorder. Hyper- and hyporesponsivity to sensory stimuli have historically been conceptualized as separate constructs but may co-occur within individuals. Sensory processing may impact both lower and higher-level cognitive processes; thus, it is crucial to understand the relationships between hyper- and hyporesponsivity within and across modalities, as well as the relationship between sensory processing and other aspects of development in both autistic and typically developing (TD) children. In 3-4-year-old children ( n =41 autism; n =37 TD), we assessed relationships between sensory hyper- and hyporesponsivity both within and across visual, auditory, touch, and oral sensory modalities as measured by caregiver report. Secondary analyses evaluated relationships between sensory responsivity, social communication, and cognitive abilities. We found a positive correlation between sensory hyper- and hyporesponsivity (ρ = .788, p < .001). These associations persisted within groups and within and across modalities. There are positive associations between sensory responsivity and social interaction, communication, and nonverbal developmental quotient, with associations between sensory responsivity and social communication driven by associations within the autism group. The positive correlations between hyper- and hyporesponsivity both within and across sensory modalities, which we term the "Sensory Paradox," may provide key clues to understanding sensory processing in autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders by pointing towards neural circuit-level mechanisms that may underlie neurodevelopmental conditions. This study was funded by NIH/NINDS 1R01NS134948-01 (ARL), NIMH T32MH112510 (KDC), the Simons Foundation Autism Research Initiative (Award number 648277, ARL), and the Eagles Autism Foundation (ARL). Evidence before this study: Up to 95% of autistic individuals are impacted by sensory processing differences. Across the full range of the autism spectrum, including individuals with profound ASD and self-advocates who speak publicly on issues of neurodiversity, improving sensory processing challenges is repeatedly noted as a common goal that would improve quality of life. Classical medical evaluation of sensory processing typically focuses on whether the structural pathways for transmission of sensory information are intact. The modulation of sensory information as it traverses these pathways, however, is a field ripe for further understanding. Initial reports have identified both hyper- and hyporesponsivity to sensory stimuli in autism, with some overlap between the two patterns of behavior.Added value of this study: This study demonstrates the seemingly paradoxical finding that hyper- and hyporesponsivity are strongly positively correlated in both autistic and typically developing toddlers. This positive correlation persists within groups and within individual sensory modalities (sight, sound, touch, and oral), as well as across modalities.Implications of all of the available evidence: The current findings, taken together with prior literature, support the Sensory Paradox - a framework for understanding sensory processing and the resulting sensory experience of autistic individuals which may also have key implications for a wider variety of neurological, psychiatric, and developmental conditions. Rather than considering hyper- and hyporesponsivity as static and opposing constructs, future work on the neurobiology, diagnosis, and management of sensory processing will benefit from considering the variable and context-dependent nature of sensory processing within individuals.

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by difficulties with social interaction and restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior. Altered sensory processing and perception are consideredcharacteristics of ASD. Sensory processing differences (SPDs) are commonly observed in individuals with ASD, leading to atypical responses to sensory stimuli.SPDs refer to the way in which individuals receive, process, and respond to sensory information from the environment. People with SPDs may be hypersensitive (over-reactive) or hyposensitive (under-reactive) to sensory input, or they may experience fragmented or distorted perceptions. These differences can make it difficult for individuals with SPDs to filter out irrelevant sensory information, and to integrate sensory information from different sources. This study intends to investigate the underlying mechanisms contributing to SPDs in individuals with autism and determine the effectiveness of sensory-based therapies in addressing these challenges. The literature suggests that altered neural pathways, sensory gating dysfunction, and atypical sensory modulation contribute to SPDs in individuals with ASD. Assistive technology, environmental changes, and sensory-based interventions like sensory integration therapy (SIT) have all shown promise in improving sensory functioning and reducing associated behavioral issues. However, further research is needed to improve our understanding of sensory processing in autism and to optimize interventions for individuals with ASD.

OBJECTIVE. This retrospective study explored sensory processing characteristics in preschool-age children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD); the relationships between sensory processing and problem behavior, adaptive behavior, and cognitive function; and the differences in sensory processing between two subgroups (autism and pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified). METHOD. Study measures included the Short Sensory Profile (SSP), Aberrant Behavior Checklist-Community, Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, and Mullen Scales of Early Learning. RESULTS. Most of the children with ASD had sensory processing challenges, and a significant relationship was found between SSP total scores and problem behavior scores; however, no significant relationships were found between SSP total scores and adaptive behavior and cognitive functioning. Although all the children had low Vineland scores, approximately one-quarter of the children had typical SSP scores. No significant differences in SSP scores were found between the subgroups. CONCLUSION. The findings highlight the importance of comprehensive evaluations for children with ASD.

Sensory processing and sleep characteristics in preterm infants in the early period of life

ObjectivesChildren and young people with intellectual disability (ID) face an extraordinary number of obstacles to accessing healthcare services. By their nature, clinical settings are highly sensory environments which can be...

Sensory processing disorders in children with cerebral palsy