Cited by 26Infant Development and Preterm CareNeuroscience and Music PerceptionHearing Loss and Rehabilitation

Left temporal impairment of auditory information processing in prematurely born 9-year-old children: an electrophysiological study

Gomot, Marie, Bruneau, Nicole, Laurent, Jean-Paul, Barthélémy, Catherine, Saliba, Elie·2007·International Journal of Psychophysiology

Abstract

Children born preterm more than average display cognitive difficulties that are significant enough to prevent normal schooling. The aim of our study was to provide better understanding of the long-term neuropathological processes associated with preterm injury, through the hypothesis that mild cognitive disorders might be related to slight deficits in primary functions such as attention and perception. Assessment of auditory pre-attentive processes was performed by recording the obligatory sensory response (N250) and the change-detection response (Mismatch Negativity, MMN). Topographic study of these responses was performed in fifteen 9-year-old children born preterm (27-33 weeks gestational age) matched to fifteen control children born at term. The auditory stimulus sequence consisted of 1000 Hz standard and 1100 Hz deviant tones (15%) delivered binaurally with an interstimulus interval of 700 ms. The results showed that MMN was similar in both groups. Analysis of the responses to standard repetitive tones demonstrated significantly smaller N250 wave amplitude in children born preterm. Scalp current density maps showed that this reduction in amplitude was associated with lower activity of both frontal and left supratemporal generators. Although the functional significance of the N250 wave in children remains to be clarified, our results indicate a disorder of auditory processes related to prematurity that might have consequences on the development of higher-level processes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.01.003

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 40 · Cited by 26

Authors
Gomot, M., Bruneau, N., Laurent, J.-P., Barthélémy, C., & Saliba, E.
Affiliations
  • Université de Tours (FR)
  • Université Paris 8 (FR)
Corresponding author
Gomot, Marie
Venue
International Journal of Psychophysiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-05
Volume
64
Issue
2
Pages
123-129
ISSN
0167-8760 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2095946951
Cited by
26
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Psychophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Keywords
preterm birth, auditory processing, N250, mismatch negativity, pre-attentive auditory processing, left temporal cortex, cognitive impairment, attention deficits, auditory perception
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Attention, Auditory Perception, Child, Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Infant, Premature, Functional Laterality, Male, Reference Values, Temporal Lobe, Matched-Pair Analysis, Premature Birth

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review