MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405814086 · doi:10.12771/emj.2024.e79

Sex differences in the prevalence of common comorbidities in autism: a narrative review

2024· review· en· W4405814086 on OpenAlexaff
Y. Hong, Da‐Yea Song, Hee‐Jeong Yoo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Ewha Medical Journal · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsSurrey Place Centre
FundersMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsAutismNarrativeNarrative reviewMedicinePsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychologyArtLiteratureIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autism spectrum disorder involves challenges in social communication and restricted, repetitive behaviors. Historically, males have received autism diagnoses at comparatively high rates, prompting an underrepresentation of females in research and an incomplete understanding of sex-specific symptom presentations and comorbidities. This review examines sex differences in the prevalence of common comorbidities of autism to inform tailored clinical practices. These conditions include attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety disorders, conduct disorder, depression, epilepsy, intellectual disability, and tic disorders. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is prevalent in both sexes; however, females may more frequently exhibit the inattentive subtype. Anxiety disorders display inconsistent sex differences, while conduct disorder more frequently impacts males. Depression becomes more common with age; some studies indicate more pronounced symptoms in adolescent girls, while others suggest greater severity in males. Epilepsy is more prevalent in females, especially those with intellectual disabilities. Despite displaying a male predominance, intellectual disability may exacerbate the severity of autism to a greater degree in females. No clear sex differences have been found regarding tic disorders. Overall, contributors to sex-based differences include biases stemming from male-centric diagnostic tools, compensatory behaviors like camouflaging in females, genetic and neurobiological differences, and the developmental trajectories of comorbidities. Recognizing these factors is crucial for developing sensitive diagnostics and sex-specific interventions. Inconsistencies in the literature highlight the need for longitudinal studies with large, diverse samples to investigate autism comorbidities across the lifespan. Understanding sex differences could facilitate earlier identification, improved care, and personalized interventions, thus enhancing quality of life for individuals with autism.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Ewha Medical JournalSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207