Introduction
Autism Spectrum Disorder (
1) is defined as a lifelong neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by two key symptoms: persistent deficits in social communication/interaction and restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior and abnormal sensory responses (
2). The severity of these symptoms varies extensively from one patient to another, leading to a multitude of clinical presentations. Onset of ASD can usually be observed during childhood, with signs detectable as early as 18 months of age (
3,
4). However ASD remains extremely challenging to diagnose due to the diversity of clinical presentations and diagnosis requires both awareness from parents and caregivers to detect signs and an assessment from a multidisciplinary medical/paramedical team to confirm signs (
4). As a consequence, estimating the prevalence of ASD is challenging, as illustrated by Chiarotti and Venerosi (
5) who recently conducted a worldwide narrative review on this topic (except for the African and Latin American regions) and confirmed the high variability in reported prevalence across regions. The authors reported high inter and intra variability across regions, with estimates ranging from 0.42 to 3.13% in Europe, 0.11 to 1.53% in Middle-East, 0.08 to 9.3% in Asia, and 0.87 to 1.85% in North America (
5).
Furthermore, individuals with ASD often present co-morbid psychiatric disorders. In a recent review, Hossain et al. (
6) reported two studies estimating the prevalence of at least one comorbid psychiatric disorder at 54.8% and up to 94%, with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), anxiety, depressive disorders and sleep disorders being the most frequent co-morbidities. In addition, individuals with ASD are more likely to experience somatic co-morbidities such as epilepsy, gastrointestinal (GI) disorders or sight/hearing impairments (
7). Both psychiatric and somatic comorbidities further complicate the diagnosis of ASD as they can either exacerbate or mitigate typical symptoms of autism. This can lead to misdiagnosis with inadequate management or delays in diagnosis with missed opportunity for treatment (
8). Additionally, numerous studies have demonstrated the negative impacts of co-morbidities on autistic individuals as well as their surroundings, both in terms of quality of life and economic burden (
9,
10). The latest version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) now allows for consideration of additional diagnoses besides ASD and may have impacted the prevalence of co-morbidities (
2,
11). Additionally, the new classification may also have contributed to the limitation of capturing the differences in prevalence observed between males and females for ASD and co-morbidities (
7). Ratto et al. (
12) provided evidence of potential sex differences in autistic traits and adaptive skills; however, further investigations on the clinical presentations of ASD in males and females are needed to understand the factors explaining these differences in diagnosis rates. As such, it is of importance to have a clear understanding of the prevalence of ASD and its co-morbidities to raise awareness among stakeholders so both can be identified sooner and managed optimally. The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence and time trends of ASD, as well as frequently observed co-morbidities (psychiatric and somatic) in children and adolescents in the United States (US) and five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK). As a secondary objective, this study also looked at how age and gender were linked to the prevalence estimates of ASD and its co-morbidities.
Discussion
The objective of this study was to describe the clinical burden associated with ASD in children and adolescents based on recent prevalence data and trends over time, as well as understanding the prevalence of nine co-morbidities associated with ASD and potential differences by age and gender. Our research focused on children and adolescents with ASD (age < 18y) and considered studies conducted in the US, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and UK.
Our first review found the latest prevalence data for each country, with 1.70 and 1.85% in the US in children aged 4y and 8y respectively, while prevalence of ASD in Europe ranged from 0.38% in Germany (0–24 years) to 1.55% (3–5 y) in Spain. Of note, Fuentes et al. (
53) recently published the results of the ASDEU initiative for Spain and reported a prevalence of 0.59% in children aged 7–9y, which is substantially lower than the one reported by Morales-Hidalgo et al. (
18). Although the overall screening and diagnosis processes are similar in both studies, the difference can be explained by the difference in sample sizes [10,512 participants in Fuentes et al. (
53) vs. 2,827 in Morales‐Hidalgo et al. (
18)]. Prevalence data for the US is based on the ADDM network, an active and national surveillance system that reported the prevalence of ASD since 2000. However, the methodologies used to estimate the prevalence of ASD in the five European countries were all different, whether in terms of age group considered or method to estimate prevalence. The absence of a global European surveillance network implies that each country individually assesses the prevalence in its own population. As such estimates between European countries are highly heterogeneous, which makes interpretation and comparison of these differences challenging. These differences in prevalence can also be extended to country healthcare systems as most countries in Europe have their own way of diagnosing, apprehending and managing ASD. Our findings are in accordance with those of Chiarotti and Venerosi (
5) who conducted a narrative review on the worldwide prevalence of ASD, and identified the same studies. Similarly, Autism Europe estimates between 1.0 and 1.5% the prevalence of ASD in Europe, which is in line with the prevalence of 1.22% reported by ASDEU (
5). The higher prevalence reported in ASDEU compared to the five above mentioned European countries can be explained by the inclusion of countries with high prevalence such as Iceland who reported a prevalence of 2.68%, possibly due to the limited population of the country. Male to female ratios in our review varied between 2.7 in Germany and 6.5 in the UK and is consistent with previous studies that are supportive of a 4:1 ratio. Studies have shown that prevalence is potentially underestimated in females, as autistic females could better escape diagnosis or ASD may only become evident in adolescence when social demands increase (
12,
54). Overall, current evidence is supportive of a global increase in ASD over the past years, while suggesting that the augmentation is not specific to a particular region or healthcare system, but is observed at a broader level. Possible hypothesis behind this progression have been well formulated in Myers et al. (
21) who suggested that the increase in prevalence is a result of better professional and public awareness of ASD rather than a true augmentation in the number of cases. Another explanation could be the focus of clinical practice on subtle expression of symptoms in high-functioning autistic children over the past years. Finally, internal and external causes such as parental age or exposure to drugs like thalidomide or valproic acid during pregnancy could also be associated to this augmentation (
55). However, the current evidence around the role of some of these factors is still unclear and represents active areas of research (
4).
It is possible that prevalence estimates in ASD are underestimated for multiple reasons, the first one lying in complexity of the disorder itself. ASD is a complex disorder associated with a wide array of phenotypes and numerous levels of severity. International guidelines on ASD suggest that each case should be considered individually and diagnosis made by a multidisciplinary team. However, availability of multidisciplinary teams and expert clinicians is rare, leading to extended waiting list and children escaping diagnosis. Underestimation of the prevalence of ASD could also be attributed to the multiplicity of diagnostic tools available. Such tools are commonly used to support diagnosis and complete clinical assessment, but no gold standard officially exists. Although, the combination of the ADOS and ADI-R is commonly reported, both tools require time and skills to administer which can lead to inaccurate evaluations. On the other hand, it is also possible for prevalence to be overestimated in case of misdiagnosis with other disorders and in situations where ASD is associated with services and care that would not be otherwise granted for other disorders. Evidence as to whether the switch from the DSM-IV to the DSM-5 algorithm of ASD has impacted on its prevalence is conflicting (
56,
57).
As for the prevalence of co-morbidities in ASD, our SLR included a total of 33 studies and highlighted wide prevalence ranges for each co-morbidity: 0.0–86% for ADHD (17/33 studies), 0.0–82.2% for anxiety (13/33 studies), 0.0–38.6% for depressive disorders (12/33 studies), 2.8–43.75% for epilepsy/seizures (12/33 studies), 0.0–49.0% for GI syndromes (7/33 studies), 0.0–87.8% for hearing impairment (3/33 studies), 0.0–91.7% for ID, 6.4–72.5% for sleep disorders (5/33 studies) and 0.0–15.3% for visual impairment (3/33 studies). Lower estimates of 0.0% for ADHD, anxiety, depressive disorders and ID originate from Houghton et al. (
36) and correspond to prevalence estimates for the 3–4 year old age group. Similarly, estimates of 0.0% for both hearing and visual impairments are based on the results of Polyak et al. (
34) although they correspond to a highly specific population of ASD children with rare copy number variants. In their umbrella review, Hossain et al. reported ranges of 25.7–65.0% for ADHD, 1.5–54.0% for anxiety and 2.5–47.1% for depressive disorders while Lai et al. calculated a pooled prevalence of 28% for ADHD, 20% for anxiety, 11% for depressive disorders and 13% for sleep-wake disorders (
6). However both studies considered pediatric and adult populations and different definitions for co-morbidities.
The literature suggests that the prevalence of some co morbidities can be different with age and gender. Prevalence of ADHD and anxiety appear to increase until adolescence, with a decline observed when reaching adulthood (
41,
42,
58). In addition, evidence is supportive of a higher prevalence of ADHD in male compared to female individuals (
32,
37,
40). Epilepsy and depressive disorders were predominant in female individuals and slightly increasing with age (
33,
38,
41,
42). Sleep disorders were more frequently observed in children than adolescents (
41,
42). Evidence related to visual and hearing impairment is scarce and insufficient to formulate hypothesis about the impact of age. ADHD was found to be associated with a greater risk of having other psychiatric comorbidities in addition to lower cognitive functioning, more severe social impairment and greater delays in adaptive functioning (
36). Comorbid epilepsy often occurs in conjunction with ID and was associated with worse behavioral and social outcomes, increased motor difficulties and more challenging behavior compared with ASD alone (
59). Our review also gathered evidence that co-morbidities are more frequently observed in ASD individuals compared to typically developed population, which is in accordance with the current literature (
7).
Similar to our findings for the prevalence of ASD, several factors should be considered when interpreting the heterogeneity in co-morbidity prevalence. First, the definition for a given co-morbidity differed across studies. This was observed particularly for anxiety disorders where claim database studies such as Houghton et al. (
39) considered a wide array of disorders from anxiety states to dissociative disorders, whereas the prevalence reported in Stacy et al. (
32) corresponds to “anxiety” without further information. As such, the presence of subtypes within a single co-morbidity is a factor for heterogeneity. Second, study design and methodology should be considered when interpreting our results as our review included a mix of cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies. Although informative, prevalence rates from surveys should be interpreted carefully as they are subject to multiple bias from parents who often must confirm or infer the presence of a co-morbidity based on a single question. Similarly, claims database analyses do not provide information regarding the diagnostic process undertaken and instrument(s) used to confirm the presence of the co-morbidity. Finally, diagnostic ambiguity should be considered when interpreting prevalence of co-morbidities as it is often challenging to distinguish a co-morbidity from the presentation of autism. As an example, deficit in communication/interaction in autism can be interpreted as an anxiety disorder while conversely it can prevent from reporting symptoms potentially attributable to a co-morbidity.
Our study presents several limitations. First, a broad search term for comorbidity was considered and not terms for specific comorbidities. This approach allowed us to identify the most frequently observed comorbidities in ASD whose relevance was further confirmed by clinical experts. The second limitation lies in the decision to include studies reporting prevalence as a secondary outcomes. While these studies did provide relevant information, the rates extracted from these studies might include a selection bias by selecting specific subpopulations of children with ASD. Third, although the purpose of this study was to provide a descriptive review of the prevalence of ASD and its co-morbidities, additional research could involve analysis focusing on a single co-morbidity to estimate an overall prevalence rate while accounting for the heterogeneity across studies highlighted in our research. Fourth, our review focused on the most common co-morbidities reported in the literature but other co-morbidities can be observed in association with ASD such as dementia or allergic/autoimmune diseases. Finally, as our search strategy focused on children and adolescents in the U.S. and five European countries, this study did not capture the evidence generated in other geographic regions as well as in adults with ASD.
Our research provides a descriptive review of the prevalence of ASD and its co-morbidities which can be valuable for clinicians as well as parents/guardians of children with ASD. Despite substantial heterogeneity in estimates, our results indicate that co-morbidities are highly prevalent in ASD, and should be kept under consideration when diagnosing and managing individuals with ASD. In addition, co-morbidities should be re-assessed regularly as evidence suggest that prevalence evolves over time, especially during transition ages such as entry to school or adolescence. Also, co-morbidities bring additional heterogeneity to the presentation of ASD, further advocating for personalized and tailored approaches to treatment and support. Finally, co-morbidities in ASD negatively impact the quality of life and life expectancy of individuals as well as representing a substantial economic burden. Results from Hirvikoski et al. (
60) reported a 2.56-fold increased odds of mortality in individuals with ASD compared with matched general population while Hedgecock et al. (
61) reported a negative correlation between quality of life and behavioral disorders in autistic children. Buescher et al. (
9) estimated the mean annual cost of ASD to be $63,292 and $52,205 in children aged 0–5y and 6–17y respectively. However costs increased to $107,863 and $85,690 in children with ASD and co-morbid ID. Similarly, Houghton et al. (
39) showed that psychiatric co-morbidities in ASD were associated with increased medication and increased GP interactions, thus leading to higher healthcare resource consumption and potentially higher rates of adverse events from medication.
Our findings have clear implications for the diagnostic process of young people referred for suspicion of ASD and for service organization. The relative high probabilities of psychiatric and somatic co-occurring conditions should be incorporated into clinical guidelines for assessing ASD. The assessment should not only be focused on identifying the core symptoms of ASD but also on the wider range of other psychiatric and somatic problems. To this end, systematic information from parents and teachers should be collected through validated broad band questionnaires that tap internalizing and externalizing behavior problems, such as the ASEBA Questionnaires (
62), the Conners Questionnaires (
63), or the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) (
64). The diagnostic work-up should also include an interview about somatic signs and symptoms, and a standard physical exam. Preferably, clinical care should be organized around the patient and provided by a multidisciplinary team of health care professionals with expertise in complementary areas.
These findings are supportive of a global increase in ASD prevalence independent from regions and healthcare systems and call for stronger awareness within populations and healthcare policies. Our review also provides prevalence estimates for nine co-morbidities frequently associated with ASD and highlighted the importance of age and gender in prevalence of both ASD and its co-morbidities. Across Europe, there is still a need for studies applying a similar methodology when estimating prevalence in order to allow comparison across countries. This review highlights the substantial clinical burden associated with ASD, with co-morbidities further complicating evaluation, management and prognosis of ASD. Finally reliable estimates for prevalence of ASD and associated co-morbidities would support economic analysis and further assessment of burden in ASD.