Neural self-representation in autistic women and association with 'compensatory camouflaging'.

The sample was modest and likely not large enough to detect small differences, so the lack of significant brain differences in autistic women cannot be taken as proof that their neural responses are the same as non-autistic women. Participants were verbally and intellectually able adults, so the findings may not apply to younger, minimally verbal or intellectually disabled autistic people. The age range was 18 to 45 years, and the study did not measure age of diagnosis, prior autism support, or social experience, so it cannot say how life experience shaped the findings. Autistic men and women were matched on age and IQ, not on diagnostic scores, and lower observed social-affect scores in autistic women may partly reflect camouflaging. The study focused on selected brain regions, so differences in other regions were not tested. Sex and gender were not separated into their biological and experiential components. The camouflaging score was an exploratory way of estimating camouflaging from self-report or mentalizing-test scores and observed ADOS social-affect scores; it was not measured in non-autistic participants and is not a validated clinical measure. The design was cross-sectional and correlational, so it cannot show that camouflaging causes brain activity differences or the reverse.

The study was supported by the UK Medical Research Council and EU-AIMS, with EU-AIMS receiving Innovative Medicines Initiative support that included in-kind contributions from EFPIA companies. E.T.B. was employed half-time by GlaxoSmithKline and held GlaxoSmithKline stock; P.S. received authorship royalty payments from Guilford Press. Other authors reported no financial relationships with commercial interests.

Do not read the lack of significant brain differences in autistic women as proof that their social brain function is the same as non-autistic women. The sample was modest and likely not large enough to detect small differences, and the study was cross-sectional, so it cannot show cause.