scholarly journals Detection without further processing or processing without automatic detection? Differential ERP responses to lexical-semantic processing in toddlers at high clinical risk for autism and language disorder

Cortex ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chiara Cantiani ◽  
Valentina Riva ◽  
Chiara Dondena ◽  
Elena Maria Riboldi ◽  
Maria Luisa Lorusso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Automatic Detection ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
Clinical Risk ◽  
High Clinical Risk

scholarly journals At Risk for Schizophrenic or Affective Psychoses? A Meta-Analysis of DSM/ICD Diagnostic Outcomes in Individuals at High Clinical Risk

2012 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 923-932 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Fusar-Poli ◽  
Andreas Bechdolf ◽  
Matthew John Taylor ◽  
Ilaria Bonoldi ◽  
William T. Carpenter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Affective Psychoses ◽  
Clinical Risk ◽  
High Clinical Risk ◽  
Diagnostic Outcomes

scholarly journals Brain Activation During Reading in Deep Dyslexia: An MEG Study

2000 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 622-634 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matti Laine ◽  
Riitta Salmelin ◽  
Päivi Helenius ◽  
Reijo Marttila
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Semantic Analysis ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Word Reading ◽  
Brain Activity ◽  
Temporal Cortex ◽  
Single Word ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
Deep Dyslexia ◽  
Single Word Reading

Magnetoencephalographic (MEG) changes in cortical activity were studied in a chronic Finnish-speaking deep dyslexic patient during single-word and sentence reading. It has been hypothesized that in deep dyslexia, written word recognition and its lexical-semantic analysis are subserved by the intact right hemisphere. However, in our patient, as well as in most nonimpaired readers, lexical-semantic processing as measured by sentence-final semantic-incongruency detection was related to the left superior-temporal cortex activation. Activations around this same cortical area could be identified in single-word reading as well. Another factor relevant to deep dyslexic reading, the morphological complexity of the presented words, was also studied. The effect of morphology was observed only during the preparation for oral output. By performing repeated recordings 1 year apart, we were able to document significant variability in both the spontaneous activity and the evoked responses in the lesioned left hemisphere even though at the behavioural level, the patient's performance was stable. The observed variability emphasizes the importance of estimating consistency of brain activity both within and between measurements in brain-damaged individuals.

The time-course of morphosyntactic and semantic priming in late bilinguals: A study of German adjectives

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 435-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
SINA BOSCH ◽  
HELENA KRAUSE ◽  
ALINA LEMINEN
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Time Course ◽  
Semantic Information ◽  
Temporal Dynamics ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Behavioral Experiment ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
Brain Responses ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Spatially Extended

How do late proficient bilinguals process morphosyntactic and lexical-semantic information in their non-native language (L2)? How is this information represented in the L2 mental lexicon? And what are the neural signatures of L2 morphosyntactic and lexical-semantic processing? We addressed these questions in one behavioral and two ERP priming experiments on inflected German adjectives testing a group of advanced late Russian learners of German in comparison to native speaker (L1) controls. While in the behavioral experiment, the L2 learners performed native-like, the ERP data revealed clear L1/L2 differences with respect to the temporal dynamics of grammatical processing. Specifically, our results show that L2 morphosyntactic processing yielded temporally and spatially extended brain responses relative to L1 processing, indicating that grammatical processing of inflected words in an L2 is more demanding and less automatic than in the L1. However, this group of advanced L2 learners showed native-like lexical-semantic processing.

scholarly journals Use of Biomarkers to Guide Decisions on Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Women With Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (24) ◽  
pp. 2838-2847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Krop ◽  
Nofisat Ismaila ◽  
Fabrice Andre ◽  
Robert C. Bast ◽  
William Barlow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Hormone Receptor ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Adjuvant Systemic Therapy ◽  
Node Negative ◽  
Clinical Risk ◽  
Hormone Receptor Positive ◽  
High Clinical Risk ◽  
Positive Breast Cancer

Purpose This focused update addresses the use of MammaPrint (Agendia, Irvine, CA) to guide decisions on the use of adjuvant systemic therapy. Methods ASCO uses a signals approach to facilitate guideline updates. For this focused update, the publication of the phase III randomized MINDACT (Microarray in Node-Negative and 1 to 3 Positive Lymph Node Disease May Avoid Chemotherapy) study to evaluate the MammaPrint assay in 6,693 women with early-stage breast cancer provided a signal. An expert panel reviewed the results of the MINDACT study along with other published literature on the MammaPrint assay to assess for evidence of clinical utility. Recommendations If a patient has hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative, node-negative breast cancer, the MammaPrint assay may be used in those with high clinical risk to inform decisions on withholding adjuvant systemic chemotherapy due to its ability to identify a good-prognosis population with potentially limited chemotherapy benefit. Women in the low clinical risk category did not benefit from chemotherapy regardless of genomic MammaPrint risk group. Therefore, the MammaPrint assay does not have clinical utility in such patients. If a patient has hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative, node-positive breast cancer, the MammaPrint assay may be used in patients with one to three positive nodes and a high clinical risk to inform decisions on withholding adjuvant systemic chemotherapy. However, such patients should be informed that a benefit from chemotherapy cannot be excluded, particularly in patients with greater than one involved lymph node. The clinician should not use the MammaPrint assay to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative, node-positive breast cancer at low clinical risk, nor any patient with HER2-positive or triple-negative breast cancer, because of the lack of definitive data in these populations. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Neural Responses to Human Voice and Hemisphere Dominance for Lexical-semantic Processing

2007 ◽  
Vol 46 (02) ◽  
pp. 247-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Takahashi ◽  
N. Yahata ◽  
M. Matsuura ◽  
K. Asai ◽  
Y. Okubo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Hemispheric Dominance ◽  
Cerebral Activation ◽  
Voice Perception ◽  
Lexical Semantic ◽  
Human Voice ◽  
Fmri Study ◽  
The Right ◽  
Parietal Cortices

Summary Objectives : In our previous functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study, we determined that there was distinct left hemispheric dominance for lexical- semantic processing without the influence of human voice perception in right-handed healthy subjects. However, the degree of right-handedness in the right-handed subjects ranged from 52 to 100 according to the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI) score. In the present study, we aimed to clarify the correlation between the degree of right-handedness and language dominance in the fronto-temporo-parietal cortices by examining cerebral activation for lexical-semantic processing. Methods : Twenty-seven normal right-handed healthy subjects were scanned by fMRI while listening to sentences (SEN), reverse sentences (rSEN), and identifiable non-vocal sounds (SND). Fronto-temporo-parietal activation was observed in the left hemisphere under the SEN - rSEN contrast, which included lexical- semantic processing without the influence of human voice perception. Laterality Indexwas calculated as LI = (L - R)/(L + R) X 100, L: left, R: right. Results : Laterality Index in the fronto-temporo-parietal cortices did not correlate with the degree of right-handedness in EHI score. Conclusions : The present study indicated that the degree of right-handedness from 52 to 100 in EHI score had no effect on the degree of left hemispheric dominance for lexical-semantic processing in right-handed healthy subjects.

scholarly journals Models Predicting Psychosis in Patients With High Clinical Risk: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristiana Montemagni ◽  
Silvio Bellino ◽  
Nadja Bracale ◽  
Paola Bozzatello ◽  
Paola Rocca
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Risk ◽  
High Clinical Risk

scholarly journals Getting a grip on sensorimotor effects in lexical–semantic processing

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Heard ◽  
Christopher R. Madan ◽  
Andrea B. Protzner ◽  
Penny M. Pexman
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Lexical Semantic
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document