***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Averaged  evoked potentials ( EPs ) to clicks , r and om pitch changes ( signals ) , and r and om deletions of stimuli within a regular train of tones were examined in five autistic and five normal children .  Brainstem auditory EPs were abnormal in one of the autistic patients . The early cortical EP components P60 and N100 showed no differences across groups , whereas the P200 component of the cortical responses to clicks , as well as the late positive component ( P300 ) to the pitch changes and deleted stimuli , were significantly smaller in the autistic subjects as a group . Furthermore , when P200 and P300 amplitudes were averaged across conditions for the individual subjects , these components were smaller in every autistic subject than in any of the normal subjects . These results are consistent with the view that there are auditory defects in autism that may sometimes involve lower levels of neural transmission as manifested by abnormalities in the brainstem and auditory EP , but are more consistently manifest in higher aspects of processing that involve the registration and storage of stimulus information . It is suggested that the severe language disorder in childhood autism may be secondary to the basic deficits in higher auditory processing Event-related brain potentials ( ERPs ) of 13 - 21-year-old autistic subjects and age-matched controls were elicited by auditory stimuli in a variation of orienting response paradigms . Unexpected , novel sounds ( bizarre concoctions of human , mechanical and computer sounds ) were r and omly inserted as probes in a sequence of expected , non-novel sounds ( the word ' me ' ) . In order to help ensure that both subject groups were attending to this stream of information , each subject was required to press a button to a specified target sound ( the word ' you ' ) also r and omly inserted in the sequence of expected non-novel sounds . The ERP results showed that in both groups , unexpected , novel probes and also targets evoked a different neurophysiological response than did expected , non-novel sounds . This suggests that the autistic group did not misperceive novel information as non-novel and were able to make simple classification decisions as accurately as normal controls . However , in the autistic group , there may be less ' processing ' of the novel probes and of targets : compared to the control group , the autistic group had smaller amplitudes of two long-latency components to novels and smaller P3b amplitudes to targets . The two components to novels were termed A/Pcz/300 ( A = auditory ; P = positive ; cz = electrode site of maximum amplitude ; 300 = latency in msec ) and A/Ncz/800 . In another sequence of sounds , subjects simply listened to frequently presented ' me ' sounds ( 90 % ) and infrequently presented ' you ' sounds ( 10 % ) . In this no-task condition , no differences between autistic and normal control subjects were found Eighty children , 3–17 years of age , with autism or Asperger syndrome and mild to severe distress in the presence of some sounds , were r and omly allocated to two groups . The experimental group received auditory training and the control group listened to the same unmodified music under the same conditions . Significant improvements in behavior and severity of autism were maintained for 12 months by both groups . Informal data suggested that a range of abnormal responses to sound and other sensory abnormalities may also have improved . Verbal and performance IQ increased significantly 3 to 12 months after interventions . Findings suggest that some aspect of both auditory training and listening to selected unmodified music may have a beneficial effect on children with autism and sound sensitivity , and indicate a need for further research into the effects that led to these changes and the mechanisms involved in the sensory abnormalities commonly associated with autism Due to the myriad of problems associated with autism , parents often consider alternative treatments . The investigation was undertaken to determine the effects of the Tomatis Method on language skills in children with autism utilizing a r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled , crossover design . The results indicated that although the majority of the children demonstrated general improvement in language over the course of the study , it did not appear to be related to the treatment condition . The percent change for Group 1 ( Placebo/Treatment ) for treatment was 17.41 % , and placebo was 24.84 % . Group 2 ( Treatment/Placebo ) showed −3.98 % change for treatment and 14.15 % change for placebo . The results reflect a lack of improvement in language using the Tomatis Method for children with autism Compared 8- to 14-year-old children with either autism or receptive developmental language disorder ( RDLD ) to age- and IQ-matched normal controls in their ability to detect both frequent ( p=.70 ) and infrequent ( p=.30 ) r and omly presented auditory stimuli under task and no-task conditions . Event-related brain potentials ( ERPs ) , behavioral reaction times , and target detection accuracy rates were measured . Although the three groups of children performed in a similar manner on behavioral measures , only the children with autism demonstrated an abnormally small amplitude of the P3b , a component of the ERP . This result is interpreted in terms of ( a ) the consistency of this finding with other ERP studies involving older individuals with autism ; and ( b ) its significance with respect to the difficulty children with autism have in modifying their expectancies to context ually relevant sequences of auditory information Auditory integration training and a control treatment were provided for 16 children with autism in a crossover experimental design . Measures , blind to treatment order , included parent and teacher ratings of behavior , direct observational recordings , IQ , language , and social/adaptive tests . Significant differences tended to show that the control condition was superior on parent-rated measures of hyperactivity and on direct observational measures of ear-occlusion . No differences were detected on teacher-rated measures . Children 's IQs and language comprehension did not increase , but adaptive/social behavior scores and expressive language quotients decreased . The majority of parents ( 56 % ) were unable to report in retrospect when their child had received auditory integration training . No individual child was identified as benefiting clinical ly or educationally from the treatment 
    Output:
    
There is no evidence that auditory integration therapy or other sound therapies are effective as treatments for autism spectrum disorders .
As synthesis of existing data has been limited by the disparate outcome measures used between studies , there is not sufficient evidence to prove that this treatment is not effective .
As such , there is no evidence to support the use of auditory integration therapy at this time