4.5 Article

Could Sensory Differences Be a Sex-Indifferent Biomarker of Autism? Early Investigation Comparing Tactile Sensitivity Between Autistic Males and Females

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10803-022-05787-6

Keywords

Autism; Sensory; Tactile; Sex-differences; Psychophysics

Funding

  1. NIH/NIMH [R21MH098228, R01MH106564, R01MH078160, R00MH107719]
  2. IDDRC [P50 HD103538]
  3. Organization for Autism Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sensory differences are highly prevalent in autistic individuals. However, few studies have compared their presentation between autistic males and autistic females. Results from this study suggest that while there are sex-differences in tactile perceptual sensitivity, these differences are not specific to autism. Elevated tactile sensitivity measures in autism are comparable between autistic males and females, indicating the potential for using certain sensory features as sex-indifferent markers of autism.
Sensory differences are highly prevalent in autistic individuals. However, few studies have compared their presentation between autistic males and autistic females. We used psychophysics to assess and compare tactile perceptual sensitivity between autistic and non-autistic boys and girls aged between 8 and 12 years of age. While there were sex-differences of amplitude discrimination, frequency discrimination and order judgement thresholds, these sex-differences were not autism-specific. Mean RTs and detection thresholds were elevated in autism but were comparable between the sexes. Tactile sensitivity measures that are elevated in autism but are otherwise comparable between autistic males and autistic females suggest the possibility that certain sensory features could be used as sex-indifferent markers of autism. Further investigation with larger and more representative samples should be conducted before any stronger conclusions are made.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available