Cargando…

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Russell, Ginny, Mandy, William, Elliott, Daisy, White, Rhianna, Pittwood, Tom, Ford, Tamsin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6397505/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30867896
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13229-019-0260-x
_version_ 1783399430976700416
author Russell, Ginny
Mandy, William
Elliott, Daisy
White, Rhianna
Pittwood, Tom
Ford, Tamsin
author_facet Russell, Ginny
Mandy, William
Elliott, Daisy
White, Rhianna
Pittwood, Tom
Ford, Tamsin
author_sort Russell, Ginny
collection PubMed
description 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. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13229-019-0260-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6397505
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63975052019-03-13 Selection bias on intellectual ability in autism research: a cross-sectional review and meta-analysis Russell, Ginny Mandy, William Elliott, Daisy White, Rhianna Pittwood, Tom Ford, Tamsin Mol Autism Review 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. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13229-019-0260-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6397505/ /pubmed/30867896 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13229-019-0260-x Text en © The Author(s). 2019 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 Review
Russell, Ginny
Mandy, William
Elliott, Daisy
White, Rhianna
Pittwood, Tom
Ford, Tamsin
Selection bias on intellectual ability in autism research: a cross-sectional review and meta-analysis
title Selection bias on intellectual ability in autism research: a cross-sectional review and meta-analysis
title_full Selection bias on intellectual ability in autism research: a cross-sectional review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Selection bias on intellectual ability in autism research: a cross-sectional review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Selection bias on intellectual ability in autism research: a cross-sectional review and meta-analysis
title_short Selection bias on intellectual ability in autism research: a cross-sectional review and meta-analysis
title_sort selection bias on intellectual ability in autism research: a cross-sectional review and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6397505/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30867896
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13229-019-0260-x
work_keys_str_mv AT russellginny selectionbiasonintellectualabilityinautismresearchacrosssectionalreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mandywilliam selectionbiasonintellectualabilityinautismresearchacrosssectionalreviewandmetaanalysis
AT elliottdaisy selectionbiasonintellectualabilityinautismresearchacrosssectionalreviewandmetaanalysis
AT whiterhianna selectionbiasonintellectualabilityinautismresearchacrosssectionalreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pittwoodtom selectionbiasonintellectualabilityinautismresearchacrosssectionalreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fordtamsin selectionbiasonintellectualabilityinautismresearchacrosssectionalreviewandmetaanalysis