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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |