CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 22Down syndrome and intellectual disability researchAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchNeural dynamics and brain function

Postnatal Cerebral Maturation in Down's Syndrome Children: A Developmental Eeg Coherence Study

McAlaster, Rebecca·1992·International Journal of Neuroscience
DOI 10.3109/00207459209003296
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Eyes-closed EEG was recorded from 19 scalp locations in thirty Down's Syndrome children and young adults, aged 9 months to 26 years. These subjects were age-matched to normal children and normal young adults. EEG coherence was computed for five groups of electrode pairings: 1--anterior-to-posterior, 2--posterior-to-anterior, 3--posterior temporal, 4--anterior temporal and 5--interhemispheric. The results showed that EEG coherence strongly and consistently discriminated between the two groups. Developmental trajectories in the Down's group were weakly linear and often with negative slopes. In contrast, normal children showed strong linear and nonlinear developmental trajectories with only positive slopes. The greatest differences between groups was in the left hemisphere and in posterior cortical regions as compared to frontal regions. The normal children exhibited growth spurts in EEG coherence at particular postnatal ages, whereas the Down's Syndrome children failed to exhibit strong growth spurts in EEG development.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/00207459209003296

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • In children with DS, oscillatory networks involved in memory consolidation are disrupted within the first postnatal months.

    “Network-level functional analyses of infants and toddlers with DS are scarce, but evidence from early EEG studies suggests that oscillatory networks involved in memory consolidation are disrupted within the first postnatal months in children with DS136–138.”

    From Consequences of trisomy 21 for brain development in Down syndrome (2024) · cites this paper as [137]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
McAlaster, R.
Corresponding author
McAlaster, Rebecca
Venue
International Journal of Neuroscience
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1992-01
Volume
65
Issue
1-4
Pages
221-237
ISSN
  • 0020-7454 (ISSN-L)
  • 1543-5245
DOI
10.3109/00207459209003296
OpenAlex
W2092247261
Cited by
22
References
38
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
Down syndrome, brain maturation, EEG coherence, postnatal brain development, developmental trajectories, interhemispheric coherence, posterior cortex, left hemisphere, growth spurt, children and young adults
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Child, Child, Preschool, Dominance, Cerebral, Down Syndrome, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Infant, Male, Nerve Fibers, Neurons, Reference Values, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted

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