Selection bias on intellectual ability in autism research: a cross-sectional review and meta-analysis

Background Current global estimates suggest the proportion of the population with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who have intellectual disability (ID) is approximately 50%. Our objective was to ascertain the existence of selection bias due to under-inclusion of populations with ID across all fields...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Molecular autism Ročník 10; číslo 1; s. 9 - 10
Hlavní autoři: Russell, Ginny, Mandy, William, Elliott, Daisy, White, Rhianna, Pittwood, Tom, Ford, Tamsin
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: London BioMed Central 01.03.2019
BioMed Central Ltd
Springer Nature B.V
BMC
Témata:
Analysis
Autism
Autism spectrum disorder
Autism Spectrum Disorder - complications
Autism Spectrum Disorder - epidemiology
Bias
Biomedical Research - standards
Children & youth
Human Genetics
Humans
Intellectual disabilities
Intellectual disability
Intellectual Disability - diagnosis
Intellectual Disability - epidemiology
Intelligence (Psychology)
Intervention
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Meta-analysis
Neurology
Neuropsychology
Neurosciences
Nosology
Patient Selection
Pediatrics
Psychiatry
Psychological research
Public health
Qualitative research
Review
Selection Bias
Studies
Systematic review
United Kingdom
Autism
Selection bias
Nosology
Intellectual disability
Autism spectrum disorder
ISSN:2040-2392, 2040-2392
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:Background Current global estimates suggest the proportion of the population with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who have intellectual disability (ID) is approximately 50%. Our objective was to ascertain the existence of selection bias due to under-inclusion of populations with ID across all fields of autism research. A sub-goal was to evaluate inconsistencies in reporting of findings. Methods This review covers all original research published in 2016 in autism-specific journals with an impact factor greater than 3. Across 301 included studies, 100,245 participants had ASD. A random effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the proportion of participants without ID. Selection bias was defined as where more than 75% of participants did not have ID. Results Meta-analysis estimated 94% of all participants identified as being on the autism spectrum in the studies reviewed did not have ID (95% CI 0.91–0.97). Eight out of ten studies demonstrated selection bias against participants with ID. The reporting of participant characteristics was generally poor: information about participants’ intellectual ability was absent in 38% of studies ( n  = 114). Where there was selection bias on ID, only 31% of studies mentioned lack of generalisability as a limitation. Conclusions We found selection bias against ID throughout all fields of autism research. We recommend transparent reporting about ID and strategies for inclusion for this much marginalised group.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Feature-3
ObjectType-Evidence Based Healthcare-1
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:2040-2392
2040-2392
DOI:10.1186/s13229-019-0260-x