A Meta-analysis of Outcome Studies of Autistic Adults: Quantifying Effect Size, Quality, and Meta-regression.

Longitudinal studies have generally reported poor outcomes in adulthood for the majority of individuals (c.50–60%) with autism. Several factors putatively predict outcome (e.g. IQ), but findings remain mixed. This paper presents an updated meta-analysis of autism outcome studies and extends previous...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders Vol. 51; no. 9; pp. 3165 - 3180
Autores principales: Mason, David, Capp, Simone J., Stewart, Gavin R., Kempton, Matthew J., Glaser, Karen, Howlin, Patricia, Happé, Francesca
Formato: research tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Springer Nature Sep2021
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
Descripción
Sumario:Longitudinal studies have generally reported poor outcomes in adulthood for the majority of individuals (c.50–60%) with autism. Several factors putatively predict outcome (e.g. IQ), but findings remain mixed. This paper presents an updated meta-analysis of autism outcome studies and extends previous findings with additional analyses (including meta-regression). A total of 4088 records was screened and 18 studies, involving 1199 individuals, were included in the quantitative analysis. Estimated percentages indicated that 20.0% of participants were rated as having a good outcome, 26.6% a fair outcome, and 49.3% a poor outcome. Meta-regression indicated that lower IQ in adulthood was predictive of poor outcome; other meta-regression models did not survive correction for multiple comparisons. Overall, outcomes for autistic people are on average poor, and higher IQ appears to be protective against having a poor outcome. The limitations of current constructs of outcome are discussed.