DOI work
Fetched
Post
crossref
Hannah Edwards, Sarah Wright, Cora Sargeant, Samuele Cortese, Henry Wood‐Downie
(2024).
Research Review: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of sex differences in narrow constructs of restricted and repetitive behaviours and interests in autistic children, adolescents, and adults.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 65(1), 4-17.
Wiley.
- Publication date
-
23 Jul 2023
- Identifier
-
10.1111/jcpp.13855
- Authors
-
Hannah Edwards,
Sarah Wright,
Cora Sargeant,
Samuele Cortese,
Henry Wood‐Downie
- Source
- Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
- Details
- 65(1), 4-17
- Reference type
- article
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Metadata source
- crossref
Abstract
Background Evidence that autism often manifests differently between males and females is growing, particularly in terms of social interaction and communication, but it is unclear if there are sex differences in restricted and repetitive behaviours and interests (RRBIs) when rigorously focusing on the narrow construct level (i.e., stereotyped behaviour, restricted interests, insistence on sameness, and/or sensory experiences). Methods We conducted a systematic review and four random effects meta‐analyses investigating sex differences in narrow construct measures of RRBIs in autistic children, adolescents, and adults (Prospero registration ID: CRD42021254221). Study quality was appraised using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Results Forty‐six studies were narratively synthesised and 25 of these were included in four random effects meta‐analyses. Results found that autistic males had significantly higher levels of stereotyped behaviours (SMD = 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.09, 0.33], p <.001) and restricted interests (SMD = 0.18, 95% CI [0.07, 0.29], p <.001) compared to autistic females. In contrast, there were no significant sex differences for sensory experiences (SMD = −0.09, 95% CI [−0.27, 0.09], p =.32) and insistence on sameness (SMD = 0.01, 95% CI [−0.03, 0.05], p =.68). The findings from the narrative synthesis were generally consistent with those from the meta‐analyses and also found qualitative sex differences in the way RRBIs manifest. Conclusions Our findings show significant differences in narrowly defined RRBIs in males and females. Practitioners need to be aware of such differences, which could be contributing to the under‐recognition of autism in females and may not be captured by current diagnostic instruments.
Study authors in this cited reference