EEG data collection in children with ASD: The role of state in data quality and spectral power

Abstract

Background: Electroencephalography can elucidate neurobiological mechanisms underlying heterogeneity in ASD. Studying the full range of children with ASD introduces methodological challenges stemming from participants’ difficulties tolerating the data collection process, leading to diminished EEGdataretentionandincreasedvariabilityin participant ‘state’ during the recording. Quantifying state will improve data collection methods and aide in interpreting results. Objectives: Observationally quantify participant state during the EEG recording; examine its relationship to child characteristics, data retention and spectral power. Methods: Participants included 5–11 year-old children with D (N=39) and age-matched TD children (N=16). Participants were acclimated to the EEG environment using behavioral strategies. EEG was recorded while participants watched a video of bubbles. Participant ‘state’ was rated using a Likert scale (Perceived State Rating: PSR). Results: Participants with ASD had more elevated PSR than TD participants. Less EEG data were retained in participants with higher PSR scores, but this was not related to age or IQ. TD participants had higher alpha power compared with the ASD group. Within the ASD group, participants with high PSR had decreased frontal alpha power. Conclusions: Given supportive strategies, EEG data was collected from children with ASD across cognitive levels. Participant state influenced both EEG data retention and alpha spectral power. Alpha suppression is linked to attention and vigilance, suggesting that these participants were less ‘at rest’. This highlights the importance of considering state when conducting EEG studies with challenging participants, both to increase data retention rates and to quantify the influence of state on EEG variables.

Early patterns of functional brain development associated with autism spectrum disorder in tuberous sclerosis complex

“…The special consideration given to this specific signal processing issue resulted in the detection of individual differences in subgroups of TSC infants (ASD+/ASD−), two groups equivalently impacted by tuber burden. Additional controls for possible EEG differences contributed by behavioral differences during the recording session could be provided through a concurrent analysis of each participants behavior, as we have implemented in more recent data collection procedures [DiStefano, Dickinson, Baker, & Jeste, ].…”

ERP evidence of semantic processing in children with ASD

“…Participants with ASD first participated in an EEG net familiarization and desensitization procedure (DiStefano et al, 2018; Roesler et al, 2013). Prior to the day of testing, parents of participants were interviewed regarding their child’s preferences and interests so that the testing environment could be made as comfortable as possible with the child’s preferred reinforcers available (e.g.…”

MEG-PLAN: a clinical and technical protocol for obtaining magnetoencephalography data in minimally verbal or nonverbal children who have autism spectrum disorder

“…Similar behavioral interventions and protocols have been established for EEG (e.g., [15,[30][31][32][33]), though in general the demands on the child are lower and less "daunting" than MRI (e.g., the absence of a large and loud machine, less risk of claustrophobic experience, can be completed while sitting in a regular chair). Although more accessible for a wider range of individuals with cognitive or language limitations, EEG has limited spatial resolution and thus less accuracy for spatial localization [34].…”