Cognitive profile in adult women with turner syndrome: IQ split and associations with ADHD and ASD

Figures & data

Figure 1. The Bayes factors (BF10) quantify the relative probability of the alternative hypothesis vs the null hypothesis (Wagenmakers, 2007).

Table 1. Descriptive data for the total sample (n = 30) and grouped karyotypes (age, mean scores of AQ, ASRS, WAIS).

	Total sample	Monosomy 45,X	Mosaicism 45,X/ 46,XX	Other	Karyotype unknown
N	30	13	5	9	3
Age in years: M (SD), [min–max]	41.1 (16.7), [18–75]	39.5 (17.8), [18–75]	49.6 (19.3), [29–72]	38.3 (12.8), [23–56]	42.0 (22.5), [28–68]
FSIQ: M (SD), [min–max]	94.6 (11.4), [72–126]	93.5 (11.5), [74–108]	96.2 (17.8), [83–126]	96.4 (10.1), [72–105]	91.0 (4.6), [86–95]
VCI: M (SD), [min–max]	107.5 (12.6), [83–137]	106.5 (13.7), [87–137]	111.2 (14.3), [99–133]	106.8 (11.5), [83–122]	108.3 (13.4), [93–118]
PRI: M (SD), [min–max]	90.5 (14.0), [62–118]	90.0 (14.7), [62–116]	88.8 (19.5), [72–112]	94.0 (12.5), [74–118]	85.3 (7.0), [78–92]
WMI: M (SD), [min–max]	90.7 (12.7), [65–119]	89.9 (13.0), [65–110]	91.0 (16.5), [79–119]	91.4 (13.6), [65–108]	108.3 (13.4), [88–96]
PSI: M (SD), [min–max]	90.8 (11.0), [76–128]	89.5 (9.3), [79–117]	94.2 (19.0), [82–128]	93.7 (8.6), [79–104]	93.5 (11.5), [76–87]
AQ: M (SD), [min–max]	13.2 (6.4), [3–31]	13.5 (7.5), [3–31]	9.2 (3.9), [5–13)	15.4 (657), [9–24]	11.7 (5.0), [7–17]
ASRS: M (SD), [min–max]	3.1 (3.0), [0–11]	3.2 (3.6), [0–11]	2.8 (3.7), [0–9]	3.3 (2.0) [0–6]	2.3 (2.5) [0–5]

Note: Karyotypes of the total sample clustered into four main groups; “monosomy 45,X” (n = 13), “mosaicism 45,X/46,XX” (n = 5), and “other”* (n = 9), or “unknown” (no further information of the karyotype than confirmed TS) (n = 3).

Abbreviations: M = Mean, SD = Standard Deviation, FSIQ = Full Scale IQ, VCI = Verbal Comprehension Index, PRI = Perceptual Reasoning Index, WMI = Working Memory Index, PSI = Processing Speed Index, AQ = Autism Quotient, ASRS = Adult ADHD Self Report Scale, WAIS = Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale.

*The group “other” was created to not omit individual karyotypes and consisted of karyotypes with structural abnormalities or mosaicism other than 45,X/46,XX.

Figure 2. Percentage of the sample with a verbal > non-verbal IQ split.

Table 2. Within-subject discrepancies between index scores in WAIS-IV.

Indexes	t (29)	p (Bonferroni)*	Percentage of the sample with a discrepancy above clinical cut-off
FSIQ-VCI	−9.258	<0.01	–
FSIQ-PRI	2.670	0.12	–
FSIQ-WMI	2.667	0.12	–
FSIQ-PSI	2.371	0.25	–
VCI-PRI	6.905	<0.01	57%
VCI-WMI	7.417	<0.01	47%
VCI-PSI	6.922	<0.01	43%
PRI-WMI	−.052	>0.99	27%
PRI-PSI	−.119	>0.99	17%
PSI-WMI	−.085	>0.99	17%

Note: p-values refer to paired samples t-tests comparing individual FSIQ and specific index scores for each individual. If paired samples t-tests revealed a significant difference, the index was deemed a strength or weaknesses.

Abbreviations: FSIQ = Full-Scale IQ, VCI = Verbal Comprehension Index, PRI = Perceptual Reasoning Index, WMI = Working Memory Index, PSI = Processing Speed Index.

*p-value is corrected with Bonferroni analysis with groups of 10. Bold values indicate statistical significance at the p < 0.05 level.

Table 3. Comparisons between WAIS-IV mean subscale scores and mean values of all 10 subscales.

Subscale	Subscale score	t (29)	p (Bonferroni)*
	M (SD)
Vocabulary	10.57 (2.16)	−4.62	<0.01
Similarities	12.75 (2.78)	−11.26	<0.01
Information	10.50 (2.43)	−3.55	0.01
Digit Span	8.50 (2.26)	2.64	0.13
Arithmetic	8.57 (2.65)	1.91	0.67
Block Design	7.97 (2.36)	4.15	<0.01
Matrix Reasoning	9.2 (3.514)	0.16	>0.99
Visual Puzzles	8.13 (2.50)	2.95	0.06
Symbol Search	7.90 (2.23)	4.16	<0.01
Coding	8.43 (2.19)	2.58	0.15

Note: p-values refer to paired samples t-tests comparing each subscale to the mean of all 10 subscales for each individual. If paired samples t-tests revealed a significant difference, the subtest was deemed a strength or weaknesses.

*p-value is corrected with Bonferroni analysis with groups of 10. Bold values indicate statistical significance at the p < 0.05 level.

Figure 3. Total AQ scores and results from AQ subscales. Boxes cover the 25–75th percentile. Individual data points are shown by black dots.

Figure 4. FSIQ and WAIS-IV index scores in the full sample (n = 30) and in the sample clustered grouped by karyotype. Mon. = monosomy 45,X (n = 13), mos. = mosaicism 45,X/46,XX (n = 5), other* (n = 9), unknown (n = 3). Boxes cover the 25–75th percentile. Black lines show medians. Red diamonds show group means. Individual data points are shown by black dots. *The group “other” was created to not omit individual karyotypes and consisted of karyotypes with structural abnormalities or mosaicism other than 45,X/46,XX.

Figure 5. AQ and ASRS scores in the full sample (n = 30) and in the sample clustered grouped by karyotype. Mon. = monosomy 45,X (n = 13), mos. = mosaicism 45,X/46,XX (n = 5), other* (n = 9), unknown (n = 3). Boxes cover the 25–75th percentile. Black lines show medians. Red diamonds show group means. Individual data points are shown by black dots. *The group “other” was created to not omit individual karyotypes and consisted of karyotypes with structural abnormalities or mosaicism other than 45,X/46,XX.

Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2007). A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(5), 779–804. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194105

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, H.B.A., upon reasonable request.