The Co‐Occurrence of Autism and Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID): A Prevalence‐Based Meta‐Analysis.
Saved in:
| Title: | The Co‐Occurrence of Autism and Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID): A Prevalence‐Based Meta‐Analysis. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Sader, Michelle, Weston, Annabel, Buchan, Kyle, Kerr‐Gaffney, Jess, Gillespie‐Smith, Karri, Sharpe, Helen, Duffy, Fiona |
| Source: | International Journal of Eating Disorders. Mar2025, Vol. 58 Issue 3, p473-488. 16p. |
| Subjects: | Research funding, Autism, Meta-analysis, Disease prevalence, Descriptive statistics, Eating disorders, MEDLINE, Asperger's syndrome, Confidence intervals, Comorbidity, Psychosocial factors |
| Abstract: | Objective: Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) is a feeding and eating disorder characterized by extensive avoidance and/or restriction of food. Existing research demonstrates that ARFID is over‐represented in Autistic populations and vice‐versa, with both groups exhibiting shared characteristics. This meta‐analysis investigated the co‐occurrence between ARFID and autism via determination of autism prevalence in ARFID populations, and ARFID prevalence in Autistic groups. Method: This review systematically identified literature evaluating those with ARFID and Autistic individuals. Literature was searched for using SCOPUS, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Selected publications included Autistic individuals and those with ARFID who either received a formal diagnosis of autism and/or ARFID or met clinical threshold cut‐off scores on validated autism and/or ARFID questionnaires. Prevalence was reported in proportion‐based values alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: This meta‐analysis identified 21 studies (kARFID = 18 papers; kAutism = 3 papers) comprising of n = 7442 participants (nARFID = 1708; nAutism = 5734). Prevalence of autism diagnoses was 16.27% in those with ARFID (95% CI = 8.64%–28.53%), and ARFID prevalence in Autistic groups was 11.41% (95% CI = 2.89%–35.76%). Gender and ethnicity served as significant sources of heterogeneity in ARFID papers. There was insufficient data to provide comparator values or prevalence across study population and distinct underpinning drivers of ARFID. Discussion: Meta‐analytic findings highlight significant rates of co‐occurrence between autism and ARFID, suggesting that in clinical settings, it may be beneficial to consider screening Autistic individuals for ARFID and vice‐versa. Future research should further investigate co‐occurrence across ARFID profiles, gender, and ethnicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of International Journal of Eating Disorders is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Objective: Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) is a feeding and eating disorder characterized by extensive avoidance and/or restriction of food. Existing research demonstrates that ARFID is over‐represented in Autistic populations and vice‐versa, with both groups exhibiting shared characteristics. This meta‐analysis investigated the co‐occurrence between ARFID and autism via determination of autism prevalence in ARFID populations, and ARFID prevalence in Autistic groups. Method: This review systematically identified literature evaluating those with ARFID and Autistic individuals. Literature was searched for using SCOPUS, MEDLINE, and Web of Science. Selected publications included Autistic individuals and those with ARFID who either received a formal diagnosis of autism and/or ARFID or met clinical threshold cut‐off scores on validated autism and/or ARFID questionnaires. Prevalence was reported in proportion‐based values alongside 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: This meta‐analysis identified 21 studies (kARFID = 18 papers; kAutism = 3 papers) comprising of n = 7442 participants (nARFID = 1708; nAutism = 5734). Prevalence of autism diagnoses was 16.27% in those with ARFID (95% CI = 8.64%–28.53%), and ARFID prevalence in Autistic groups was 11.41% (95% CI = 2.89%–35.76%). Gender and ethnicity served as significant sources of heterogeneity in ARFID papers. There was insufficient data to provide comparator values or prevalence across study population and distinct underpinning drivers of ARFID. Discussion: Meta‐analytic findings highlight significant rates of co‐occurrence between autism and ARFID, suggesting that in clinical settings, it may be beneficial to consider screening Autistic individuals for ARFID and vice‐versa. Future research should further investigate co‐occurrence across ARFID profiles, gender, and ethnicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 02763478 |
| DOI: | 10.1002/eat.24369 |
