Cargando…

Commentary: sex difference differences? A reply to Constantino

Messinger et al. found a 3.18 odds ratio of male to female ASD recurrence in 1241 prospectively followed high-risk (HR) siblings. Among high-risk siblings (with and without ASD), as well as among 583 low-risk controls, girls exhibited higher performance on the Mullen Scales of Early Learning, as wel...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Messinger, Daniel S., Young, Gregory S., Webb, Sara Jane, Ozonoff, Sally, Bryson, Susan E., Carter, Alice, Carver, Leslie, Charman, Tony, Chawarska, Katarzyna, Curtin, Suzanne, Dobkins, Karen, Hertz-Picciotto, Irva, Hutman, Ted, Iverson, Jana M., Landa, Rebecca, Nelson, Charles A., Stone, Wendy L., Tager-Flusberg, Helen, Zwaigenbaum, Lonnie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4926305/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27358719
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13229-016-0093-9
_version_ 1782440084347289600
author Messinger, Daniel S.
Young, Gregory S.
Webb, Sara Jane
Ozonoff, Sally
Bryson, Susan E.
Carter, Alice
Carver, Leslie
Charman, Tony
Chawarska, Katarzyna
Curtin, Suzanne
Dobkins, Karen
Hertz-Picciotto, Irva
Hutman, Ted
Iverson, Jana M.
Landa, Rebecca
Nelson, Charles A.
Stone, Wendy L.
Tager-Flusberg, Helen
Zwaigenbaum, Lonnie
author_facet Messinger, Daniel S.
Young, Gregory S.
Webb, Sara Jane
Ozonoff, Sally
Bryson, Susan E.
Carter, Alice
Carver, Leslie
Charman, Tony
Chawarska, Katarzyna
Curtin, Suzanne
Dobkins, Karen
Hertz-Picciotto, Irva
Hutman, Ted
Iverson, Jana M.
Landa, Rebecca
Nelson, Charles A.
Stone, Wendy L.
Tager-Flusberg, Helen
Zwaigenbaum, Lonnie
author_sort Messinger, Daniel S.
collection PubMed
description Messinger et al. found a 3.18 odds ratio of male to female ASD recurrence in 1241 prospectively followed high-risk (HR) siblings. Among high-risk siblings (with and without ASD), as well as among 583 low-risk controls, girls exhibited higher performance on the Mullen Scales of Early Learning, as well as lower restricted and repetitive behavior severity scores on the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) than boys. That is, female-favoring sex differences in developmental performance and autism traits were evident among low-risk and non-ASD high-risk children, as well as those with ASD. Constantino (Mol Autism) suggests that sex differences in categorical ASD outcomes in Messinger et al. should be understood as a female protective effect. We are receptive to Constantino’s (Mol Autism) suggestion, and propose that quantitative sex differences in autism-related features are keys to understanding this female protective effect.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4926305
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49263052016-06-29 Commentary: sex difference differences? A reply to Constantino Messinger, Daniel S. Young, Gregory S. Webb, Sara Jane Ozonoff, Sally Bryson, Susan E. Carter, Alice Carver, Leslie Charman, Tony Chawarska, Katarzyna Curtin, Suzanne Dobkins, Karen Hertz-Picciotto, Irva Hutman, Ted Iverson, Jana M. Landa, Rebecca Nelson, Charles A. Stone, Wendy L. Tager-Flusberg, Helen Zwaigenbaum, Lonnie Mol Autism Commentary Messinger et al. found a 3.18 odds ratio of male to female ASD recurrence in 1241 prospectively followed high-risk (HR) siblings. Among high-risk siblings (with and without ASD), as well as among 583 low-risk controls, girls exhibited higher performance on the Mullen Scales of Early Learning, as well as lower restricted and repetitive behavior severity scores on the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) than boys. That is, female-favoring sex differences in developmental performance and autism traits were evident among low-risk and non-ASD high-risk children, as well as those with ASD. Constantino (Mol Autism) suggests that sex differences in categorical ASD outcomes in Messinger et al. should be understood as a female protective effect. We are receptive to Constantino’s (Mol Autism) suggestion, and propose that quantitative sex differences in autism-related features are keys to understanding this female protective effect. BioMed Central 2016-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4926305/ /pubmed/27358719 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13229-016-0093-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Commentary
Messinger, Daniel S.
Young, Gregory S.
Webb, Sara Jane
Ozonoff, Sally
Bryson, Susan E.
Carter, Alice
Carver, Leslie
Charman, Tony
Chawarska, Katarzyna
Curtin, Suzanne
Dobkins, Karen
Hertz-Picciotto, Irva
Hutman, Ted
Iverson, Jana M.
Landa, Rebecca
Nelson, Charles A.
Stone, Wendy L.
Tager-Flusberg, Helen
Zwaigenbaum, Lonnie
Commentary: sex difference differences? A reply to Constantino
title Commentary: sex difference differences? A reply to Constantino
title_full Commentary: sex difference differences? A reply to Constantino
title_fullStr Commentary: sex difference differences? A reply to Constantino
title_full_unstemmed Commentary: sex difference differences? A reply to Constantino
title_short Commentary: sex difference differences? A reply to Constantino
title_sort commentary: sex difference differences? a reply to constantino
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4926305/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27358719
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13229-016-0093-9
work_keys_str_mv AT messingerdaniels commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT younggregorys commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT webbsarajane commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT ozonoffsally commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT brysonsusane commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT carteralice commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT carverleslie commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT charmantony commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT chawarskakatarzyna commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT curtinsuzanne commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT dobkinskaren commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT hertzpicciottoirva commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT hutmanted commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT iversonjanam commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT landarebecca commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT nelsoncharlesa commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT stonewendyl commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT tagerflusberghelen commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino
AT zwaigenbaumlonnie commentarysexdifferencedifferencesareplytoconstantino