Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34845298›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2021

Distinctive prosodic features of people with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis study.

Seyedeh Zahra Asghari, Sajjad Farashi, Saeid Bashirian, Ensiyeh Jenabi

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Prosodic Differences in Women with theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  12. Foundations of Vocal Category Development in Autistic Infants.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Seyedeh Zahra AsghariSchool of Medicine, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
Sajjad FarashiAutism Spectrum Disorders Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran. sajjad_farashi@yahoo.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5082-6391
Saeid BashirianDepartment of Public Health, School of Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran. s_bashirian@yahoo.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2133-087X
Ensiyeh JenabiAutism Spectrum Disorders Research Center, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this systematic review, we analyzed and evaluated the findings of studies on prosodic features of vocal productions of people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in order to recognize the statistically significant, most confirmed and reliable prosodic differences distinguishing people with ASD from typically developing individuals. Using suitable keywords, three major databases including Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus, were searched. The results for prosodic features such as mean pitch, pitch range and variability, speech rate, intensity and voice duration were extracted from eligible studies. The pooled standard mean difference between ASD and control groups was extracted or calculated. Using I

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAdolescentAdultAutism Spectrum DisorderChildChild, PreschoolEmotionsFemaleHumansInfantMaleSpeechSpeech PerceptionVoiceYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34845298
PMCPMC8630064

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.