Cited by 300Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchDown syndrome and intellectual disability researchFamily and Disability Support Research

Epidemiology of autism in adults across age groups and ability levels

Open access
Brugha, Traolach S., Spiers, Nicola, Bankart, John, Cooper, Sally-Ann, McManus, Sally, Scott, Fiona J., Smith, Jane, Tyrer, Freya·2016·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: The epidemiology of autism in adults has relied on untested projections using childhood research. Aims: To derive representative estimates of the prevalence of autism and key associations in adults of all ages and ability levels. Method: Comparable clinical diagnostic assessments of 7274 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey participants combined with a population case-register survey of 290 adults with intellectual disability. Results: The combined prevalence of autism in adults of all ages in England was 11/1000 (95% CI 3–19/1000). It was higher in those with moderate to profound intellectual disability (odds ratio (OR) = 63.5, 95% CI 27.4–147.2). Male gender was a strong predictor of autism only in those with no or mild intellectual disability (adjusted OR = 8.5, 95% CI 2.0–34.9; interaction with gender, P = 0.03). Conclusions: Few adults with autism have intellectual disability; however, autism is more prevalent in this population. Autism measures may miss more women with autism.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.bp.115.174649

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Epidemiological studies indicate that ASD is more common among males than females, with a ratio estimate from the 2010 Global Burden of Disease study revealing a ratio of 4:1.

    “Epidemiological studies indicate that ASD is more common among males than females, with a ratio estimate from the 2010 Global Burden of Disease study revealing a ratio of 4:1 (Brugha et al. 2016; Loomes et al. 2017).”

    From The Diagnosis of Autism: From Kanner to DSM-III to DSM-5 and Beyond (2021) · cites this paper as Brugha et al. 2016

    The Discussion reports a male excess in the Global Burden of Disease estimate, but not a single 4:1 ratio for ASD overall: it says autistic disorders were three times as common in males and other forms of autism were over four times as common. It also notes that the male excess was not evident among adults with moderate or profound intellectual disability. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • ASD is more common in males than in females, with reported ratios ranging from 2.1 to 5.1, and an estimate of 4.1 in the 2010 Global Burden of Disease study.

    “Epidemiological administrative and community-based [Au:OK?YES] studies have suggested that ASD is more common in males than in females, with reported ratios [Au:OK to add 'with reported ratios' here?] ranging from 2.1 -5. 1, with an estimate of 4.1 in the 2010 [Au:OK?] Global Burden of Disease study 3,4 .”

    From Autism spectrum disorder (2020) · cites this paper as [4]

    The Discussion (page unavailable in our copy) reports male excess in childhood autism and a male:female ratio of 2.1:1 for children with lower IQ. It does not report a ratio of 5.1 or a precise 4.1 estimate from the Global Burden of Disease project; it says the latter estimated about three males per female for autistic disorders and over four for other forms of autism. The paper also found no clear male excess among adults with moderate to profound intellectual disability. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Most people in the world who are autistic are adults, and many of these individuals have not received a diagnosis of autism.

    “Given that most people in the world who are autistic are adults , and as many of these individuals have not received a diagnosis of autism 4,15”

    From Autism spectrum disorder (2020) · cites this paper as [4]

    The ‘Interpretation of our findings’ section says that research-identified autistic adults in a household sample had not been recognised or diagnosed by health services, and describes a large population of unrecognised adults. The paper estimates autism prevalence among adults in England, but does not establish that most autistic people worldwide are adults. Page numbers were not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The large increase in estimated prevalence of the autism spectrum reflects necessary improvements in its epidemiological modelling and aligns global estimates with estimates derived from high-quality epidemiological surveys.

    “The large increase in the estimated prevalence of the autism spectrum reflects necessary improvements in its epidemiological modelling and aligns global estimates with estimates derived from high-quality epidemiological surveys.11, 12, 13”

    From The global epidemiology and health burden of the autism spectrum: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. (2025) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Abstract reports a population-survey estimate of 11 per 1,000 adults in England, supporting the reference to an epidemiological survey estimate. Neither the Abstract nor the Interpretation of our findings says that a large increase in global estimated prevalence resulted from improved modelling or that global estimates were brought into alignment with survey estimates. The paper's statement that prevalence did not appear to increase rapidly concerns underlying rates, not the claimed change in estimates. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A large UK epidemiological study estimated autism prevalence among adults living in the community to be 9.8 per 1000, adjusted to 11 per 1000 following inclusion of a sample with intellectual disability.

    “A large UK epidemiological study estimated autism prevalence among adults living in the community to be 9.8 per 1000 (Brugha et al., 2011), adjusted to 11 per 1000 following inclusion of a sample with intellectual disability (Brugha et al., 2016).”

    From Diagnosis of autism in adulthood: A scoping review (2020) · cites this paper as Brugha et al., 2016

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Sparrow SS, Cicchetti DV, Balla DA. Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales: Second Edition (Vineland II), Survey Interview Form/Caregiver Rating Form. Pearson Assessments, 2005.
  2. Nelson HE, Willison J. National Adult Reading Test (NART). Report No: 2nd Edition. NFER-Nelson, 1991.
  3. Bhaumik S, Tyrer FC, McGrother C, Ganghadaran SK. Psychiatric service use and psychiatric disorders in adults with intellectual disability. J Intellect Disabil Res 2008; 52: 986-95.
  4. Gould J, Ashton-Smith J. Missed diagnosis or misdiagnosis: girls and women on the autism spectrum. Good Autism Pract 2011; 12: 34-41.
  5. Saemundsen E, Juliusson H, Hjaltested S, Gunnarsdottir T, Halldorsdottir T, Hreidarsson S, et al. Prevalence of autism in an urban population of adults with severe intellectual disabilities -a preliminary study. J Intellect Disabil Res 2010; 54: 727-35.
  6. Brugha TS, McManus S, Smith J, Scott FJ, Meltzer H, Purdon S, et al. Validating two survey methods for identifying cases of autism spectrum disorder among adults in the community. Psychol Med 2012; 42: 647-56.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brugha, T. S., Spiers, N., Bankart, J., Cooper, S.-A., McManus, S., Scott, F. J., Smith, J., & Tyrer, F.
Affiliations
University of Leicester (GB)
Corresponding author
Brugha, Traolach S.
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2016-12
Volume
209
Issue
6
Pages
498-503
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2400322275
Cited by
299
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 54 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
12.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, adults, prevalence, intellectual disability, gender differences, underdiagnosis in women, age groups, Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey, England
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Autistic Disorder, England, Female, Humans, Male, Intellectual Disability, Middle Aged, Registries, Comorbidity, Prevalence, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review