↓ Skip to main content

The Semiology of Motor Disorders in Autism Spectrum Disorders as Highlighted from a Standardized Neuro-Psychomotor Assessment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Semiology of Motor Disorders in Autism Spectrum Disorders as Highlighted from a Standardized Neuro-Psychomotor Assessment
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01292
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aude Paquet, Bertrand Olliac, Manuel-Pierre Bouvard, Bernard Golse, Laurence Vaivre-Douret

Abstract

Altered motor performance has been described in Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) with disturbances in walking; posture, coordination, or arm movements, but some individuals with ASD show no impairment of motor skills. The neuro-developmental processes that underpin the performance of neuro-psychomotor functions have not been widely explored, nor is it clear whether there are neuro-psychomotor functions specifically affected in ASD. Our objective was to focus on the semiology of motor disorders among children with ASD using a neuro-developmental assessment tool. Thirty-four children with ASD, with or without intellectual deficit (ID) were recruited in a child psychiatry department and Autism Resource Centers. Initial standard evaluations for diagnosis (psychiatric; psychological; psychomotor) were supplemented by a standardized assessment battery for neuro-developmental psychomotor functions (NP-MOT). The results of some NP-MOT tests differed between children with ASD with ID and those without. However, on the NP-MOT battery, neither of the two groups did well in the bi-manual and finger praxia tests (36 and 52% respectively failed). Manual and digital gnosopraxia showed some deficit (63 and 62% respectively failed). Postural deficits were found in tests for both static equilibrium (64%) and dynamic (52%). There were also difficulties in coordination between the upper and lower limbs in 58% of children. We found 75% failure in motor skills on the M-ABC test. Concerning muscular tone, significant laxity was observed in distal parts of the body (feet and hands), but hypertonia was observed in the proximal muscles of the lower limbs (reduced heel-ear angle). The results of manual and digital gnosopraxia tests point to a planning deficit in children with autism. A gesture programming deficit is also highlighted by the poor results in manual praxis, and by failures in the M-ABC tests despite prior training of the child. However, concerning global motor function, a significant difference was observed between children with and without ID. Our findings suggest a semiology of tone deregulation between proximal versus distal muscles, indeterminate tonic laterality, postural control deficit (proprioceptive), impairment of inter-hemispheric coordination (corpus callosum), and neurological soft signs such asdysdiadochokinesia, which leads us to hypothesize a general impairment of motor functions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 142 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 17%
Researcher 17 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 42 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 8%
Sports and Recreations 10 7%
Neuroscience 9 6%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 47 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 October 2020.
All research outputs
#17,812,370
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,577
of 29,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,897
of 322,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#328
of 420 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,324 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 420 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.