Background: Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) show certain characteristics in visual attention. These may generate differences with non-autistic children in the integration of relevant social information to set the basis of communication. Reliable and objective measurement of these characteristics in a language learning context could contribute to a more accurate early diagnosis of ASD. Gaze following and pupil dilation are being studied as possible reliable measures of visual attention for the early detection of ASD. The eye-tracking methodology allows objective measurement of these biomarkers. The aim of this study is to determine whether measurements of gaze following and pupillary dilation in a linguistic interaction task are potential objective biomarkers for the early diagnosis of ASD. Method: A group of 20 children between 17 and 24 months of age, made up of 10 neurotypical children (NT) and 10 children with an increased likelihood of developing ASD were paired together according to chronological age. A human face on a monitor pronounced pseudowords associated with pseudo-objects. Gaze following and pupil dilation were registered during the task These measurements were captured using eye-tracking methodology. Results: Significant statistical differences were found in the time of gaze fixation on the human face and on the object, as well as in the number of gazes. Children with an increased possibility of developing ASD showed a slightly higher pupil dilation than NT children. However, this difference was not statistically significant. Nevertheless, their pupil dilation was uniform throughout the different periods of the task while NT participants showed greater dilation on hearing the pseudoword. Conclusions: The fixing and the duration of gaze, objectively measured by a Tobii eye-tracking system, could be considered as potential biomarkers for early detection of ASD. Additionally, pupil dilation measurement could reflect differential activation patterns during word processing in possible ASD toddlers and NT toddlers.

The aim was to test the use of eye-tracking methodology for the early detection of ASD in a task of association between unfamiliar objects and pseudowords. Significant differences were found between ASD (n = 57) and TD (n = 57) Spanish speaking toddlers in the number and time of fixation. The TD children showed more and longer fixations on eyes and mouth while the ASD children attended almost exclusively to objects, making it difficult to integrate lexical and phonological information. Moreover, the TD toddlers looked at the mouth when the pseudoword was produced while the ASD toddlers did not. Gaze fixation on eyes and mouth during word learning recorded by eye-tracking may be used as a biomarker for the early diagnosis of ASD.

Background and Objectives: The aim was to compare the activity of the masseter muscles in children with different types of breathing. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted including patients aged 6–12 years with mixed dentition, who came for oral care at the Master’s Degree in Pediatric Dentistry program at the Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The sample was divided into three groups: nasal breathers without dental alterations (control group), oral breathers with dental malocclusion, and oral breathers with previous orthodontic treatment. An electromyography was performed, and statistic methods were conducted with a 95% confidence to contrast hypothesis. Results: A total of 122 children were analyzed and distributed into three groups. The electrical muscle activity of masseters was significantly different between the study groups (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Pairwise comparisons revealed a significantly higher electrical muscle activity in the control group (nasal breathers) during chewing compared to both groups of oral breathers (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). Orthodontic treatment decreased electrical muscle activity during isometric contraction in oral breathers compared to nasal breathers (p < 0.001), but did not significantly affect electrical muscle activity during chewing. Higher decompensation values were obtained in oral breathers without previous orthodontic treatment compared the other study groups (p < 0.001 for both comparisons), although electrical muscle activity values were similar in both groups of oral breathers (p > 0.05 for both comparisons). Conclusions: Differences in electrical muscle activity between nasal and oral breathers can be confirmed. Oral breathers with and without orthodontic treatment showed lower electrical muscle activity of masseters during chewing than nasal breathers, while at isometric contraction, only oral breathers with previous orthodontic treatment showed lower electrical activity. Higher decompensation values were found in oral breathers without previous orthodontic treatment, in comparison to the control group and oral breathers with previous orthodontic treatment.

Dysarthria and Apraxia of Speech (AoS) are motor speech disorders in which neurological lesions differentially affect motor control, possibly leading to noticeable differences in articulation and consequently sound production. Among the sounds requiring greater motor capacity because of its articulatory complexity is the voiceless alveolar sibilant fricative /s/. The aim of this study was to identify acoustic variables able to distinguish between dysarthria and AoS, and between these disorders and normal speech in Spanish speakers. The production of this fricative was acoustically examined in 28 individuals with motor neurological disorders (20 with dysarthria, 8 with AoS) and in 28 neurologically healthy persons. Participants repeated 12 monosyllabic words containing the fricative plus one of the five Spanish vowels. The variables measured were absolute durations of the fricative, vowel, and fricative+vowel sequence, along with the vowel-to-fricative duration ratio. Findings indicate that duration of the fricative can distinguish between controls and speakers with dysarthria, but not between controls and speakers with AoS. Measures related to vowel duration served to distinguish between speakers with dysarthria and speakers with AoS and between each of them and controls. Further, speakers with dysarthria and those with AoS differed from each other and from controls in terms of articulatory variability; speakers with dysarthria showing most variability. In the latter participants, articulatory variability was higher for unrounded segments, vowels and fricatives, while in speakers with AoS this variability was higher for rounded segments. These observations are discussed within a framework of motor control models.