Tuesday, 27 December 2016

2016 autism research review on Questioning Answers

Time flies! Once again, I'm posting my annual 'state of the science' autism research review, this time covering the particularly unusual year of 2016.With around 300 blog entries to choose from, I'm changing the format this year to list a 'top 5' of areas where I think some scientific progress has been made. The caveat as ever being that there are still mountains to climb in terms of delineating aetiology, nature and importantly, how one can actually improve quality of life for those on the spectrum. At the foot of this post I've also detailed a few 'areas to watch' in the coming months/years too.So, in no particular order, here goes:1. Vitamin D and autism. As per my 'one to watch' prediction from the 2015 end-of-year review, there has been a veritable science feast focused on the sunshine vitamin/hormone in connection to autism (see here). The research discussions in 2016 started with some initial talk about 'clinical improvements' following supplementation with vitamin D (see here). This was accompanied by chatter about the possible use of pregnancy vitamin D affecting risk of offspring autism (see here and see here). Screening for vitamin D levels as and when a diagnosis of autism is received was also discussed (see here). Then, towards the end of the year, things got really interesting as one of the first controlled trials of vitamin D supplementation in autism was published (see here) with the promise of more to come (see here). The findings (double-blind, placebo-controlled) suggested that for some at least, vitamin D over placebo might have the ability to affect the presentation of some aspects of autism. The caveats? Well, larger controlled trials are required and one has to be careful about doses of vitamin D in light of some cautionary tales (see here). What else needs to be done on the topic of vitamin D and autism? Given the number of conditions the sunshine vitamin has been linked to - some labels potentially crossing over with autism - a wider view of any 'effects' outside of those just on core autism symptoms might be useful. This will probably also provide some more potentially information about the possible hows-and-whys of vitamin D action.2. Autism as a plural condition. 'The autisms' is a phrase not unfamiliar to this blog (see here) but this year, a couple of papers really started putting some scientific flesh on to the bones of the argument for why we need to rethink autism. Discussions on the paper by Lynn Waterhouse and colleagues [1] (see here) set the tone for such a debate and how the label of autism serves a purpose in defining / describing symptoms but seemingly does little else when it comes to a research perspective looking at the hows-and-whys of autism. That autism seemingly appears alongside a long list of other conditions including quite a few of the various inborn errors of metabolism (see here and see here) substantiates the idea that a singular labels says very little about the 'essence' of autism. And speaking of ESSENCE (see here), there was yet more on this important topic. Another part of this 'pluralisation' debate is the fact that the 'autism is a lifelong condition' mantra rolled out again and again and again might not necessarily ring true for everyone who was once diagnosed on the autism spectrum (see here and see here). And to say that these children/adults were 'never autistic in the first place' does a real disservice to them, their parents and loved ones and the professionals who diagnosed them...3. Meta-analysing autism. Mirroring what seems to be apparent in the research literature in general, a whole slew of meta-analyses and systematic reviews on the topic of autism emerged this year. We had reviews on long-term outcome and quality of life (see here), behavioural outcomes following exercise (see here), medication (see here and see here), joint intervention strategies (see here), pregnancy infection and offspring autism risk (see here) and allergic asthma and autism (see here) to name but a few. One of the particularly notable reviews of the collected data was that by Nevill and colleagues [2] on the topic of parent-mediated interventions for young children with autism. Covering a topic with more than a pinch of media hype this year (see here), the science behind the hype in this area actually turns out to be not that strong at the moment...4. Real-world autism. Although I'm partial to reading quite a bit on the science about autism, one thing I hope I never forget is how that science translates into 'action' when it comes to autism, either in terms of 'hows-and-whys' or impacting on the day-to-day positives and negatives of living with the label. This year I've talked about more research on the topic of 'real world autism' covering various angles including: wandering and autism (see here), parents lived experience of offspring autism diagnosis and beyond (see here and see here), early mortality and autism (...

Waterhouse, L., London, E., & Gillberg, C. (2016) ASD Validity. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 3(4), 302-329. DOI: 10.1007/s40489-016-0085-x  

Nevill, R., Lecavalier, L., & Stratis, E. (2016) Meta-analysis of parent-mediated interventions for young children with autism spectrum disorder. Autism. DOI: 10.1177/1362361316677838  




from Research Blogging - Psychology - English http://ift.tt/2iacNyE
via https://ifttt.com/ IFTTT

No comments:

Post a Comment