Cited by 20Genetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersGenomics and Rare DiseasesWilliams Syndrome Research

Exploring the cognitive phenotype of Kabuki (Niikawa–Kuroki) syndrome

Open access
van Dongen, L. C. M., Wingbermühle, P. A. M., van der Veld, W. M., Stumpel, C., Kleefstra, T., Egger, J. I. M.·2019·Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

Abstract

Background: Kabuki syndrome (KS) is a Mendelian disorder, characterised by short stature, facial dysmorphisms and developmental delay and/or intellectual disability. Clarification of the neurocognitive profile in KS may provide directions for education and treatment interventions for KS. Previous studies on cognitive functioning in KS are scarce and have mainly focused on the general level of intelligence. The few more extensive studies suggested weaknesses in language skills, visuoconstruction, perceptual reasoning and speed of information processing. Other relevant domains such as memory, executive functioning and social cognition have not been studied yet. Method: This is the first study in which cognitive functioning within multiple domains is systematically explored in 29 participants with KS (age range: 5–48 years) and compared to both norm groups (healthy population) and an appropriate control group of 15 individuals with other genetic syndromes (age range: 6–28 years). Results: Compared to the norm groups of the cognitive test manuals, as expected, participants with KS show a weaker performance on all cognitive tests. Comparison with the more appropriate genetic control group indicates weaknesses in visuoconstruction and visual memory and no weaknesses in planning, cognitive flexibility or social cognition. Verbal memory seems to be a relative strength. Conclusions: Individuals with KS suffer from specific weaknesses in visuoconstruction, in addition to their intellectual disability/developmental delay. These impairments in visuoconstruction plausibly result from problems in visual perceptual processing, which highlight the importance of the use of auditory cues instead of visual cues in targeted educational support and psychosocial interventions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jir.12597

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Other monogenic syndromes like Kleefstra, KBG, WitKoS, Angelman, Coffin-Sirris, Rubinstein-Taybi, Phelan-McDermid, Smith-Magenis Syndrome and Kabuki syndrome also have a clear prefrontal component in their behavioral and cognitive phenotype.

    “Other monogenic syndromes like Kleefstra, KBG, WitKoS, Angelman, Coffin-Sirris, Rubinstein-Taybi, Phelan-McDermid, Smith–Magenis Syndrome and Kabuki syndrome also have a clear prefrontal component in their behavioral and cognitive phenotype [272–280].”

    From Development of prefrontal cortex (2022) · cites this paper as [274]

    For Kabuki syndrome—the syndrome this source studies—the Abstract Results report no weaknesses in planning or cognitive flexibility relative to a genetic control group. The Discussion describes executive functioning as relatively unaffected, rather than a clear prefrontal weakness. The paper does not assess prefrontal anatomy or the other syndromes listed. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Beery K. E., 2004, Beery–Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual‐Motor Integration: Administration, Scoring, and Teaching Manual
  2. CANTAB® [Cognitive assessment software]. (2018)Cambridge cognition. All rights reserved.www.cantab.com
  3. Osterrieth P. A., 1944, Le test de copie d'une figure complexe: contribution l'étude de la perception et la mémoire, Archives de Psychologie, 30, 286
  4. Bildt A. A., 2003, Vineland Z: Sociale redzaamheidschaal voor kinderen en jeugdigen met een verstandelijke beperking
  5. Steerneman P. M. C., 2009, ToM test‐R handleiding
  6. Wechsler D., 1991, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
  7. Wechsler D., 2012, WAIS‐IV‐NL Nederlandstalige bewerking, afname‐ en scoringshandleiding

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Dongen, L. C. M., Wingbermühle, P. A. M., van der Veld, W. M., Stumpel, C., Kleefstra, T., & Egger, J. I. M.
Affiliations
  • Centre of Excellence for Neuropsychiatry Vincent van Gogh Institute for Psychiatry Venray The Netherlands
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • Behavioural Science Institute Radboud University Nijmegen Nijmegen The Netherlands
  • Department of Clinical Genetics and GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology Maastricht UMC+ Maastricht The Netherlands
Venue
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-02-06
Volume
63
Issue
6
Pages
498-506
ISSN
  • 0964-2633 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2788
OpenAlex
W2913021037
Cited by
20
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 2
FWCI
1.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Intellectual Disability Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Radboud Universiteit
  • Radboud Universitair Medisch Centrum
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Developmental Neuroscience › Williams Syndrome Research
Keywords
Kabuki syndrome, Niikawa-Kuroki syndrome, cognitive phenotypes, intellectual disability, developmental delay, visuoconstruction, visual memory, verbal memory, cognitive flexibility, social cognition, perceptual processing, genetic syndromes, educational support
MeSH terms
Abnormalities, Multiple, Adolescent, Adult, Child, Developmental Disabilities, Child, Preschool, Face, Female, Hematologic Diseases, Humans, Male, Intellectual Disability, Middle Aged, Phenotype, Psychomotor Performance, Social Perception, Visual Perception, Vestibular Diseases, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Young Adult, Executive Function, Cognitive Dysfunction

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