Gillberg Neuropsychiatry Centre, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
J Autism Dev Disord. 2019 Jun;49(6):2281-2290. doi: 10.1007/s10803-018-03871-4.
Two community-based cohorts of children with autism spectrum disorder, examined using similar assessment protocols, were pooled (n = 301) and subdivided according to history of regression. Those with regression (n = 62), 20.5% of the combined cohort, were contrasted with those without regression (n = 241) at first assessment (age range 19-60 months) and at 2-year follow-up on a range of measures. The regression group was significantly more functionally impaired, with regard to intellectual function (p < .001), language development (p < .001), and to severity of autism (p < .01) at both T1 and T2. Only 14 (23.3%) had a clearly identified underlying etiology [24 (18.6%) in the non-regressive group]. There were no significant differences between those who had regressed 'from normal' and those who had regressed 'from low' functioning.
将两个基于社区的自闭症谱系障碍儿童队列进行了合并（n=301），这些队列使用相似的评估方案进行检查，并根据回归史进行了细分。在第一次评估（年龄范围为 19-60 个月）和 2 年随访时，对有回归史的（n=62）儿童（占合并队列的 20.5%）与无回归史的（n=241）儿童进行了对比。在智力功能（p<.001）、语言发育（p<.001）和自闭症严重程度（p<.01）方面，回归组的功能障碍明显更严重，在 T1 和 T2 时都是如此。只有 14 名（23.3%）儿童有明确的潜在病因[非退行组有 24 名（18.6%）]。在从正常功能退化和从低功能退化的儿童之间，没有显著差异。
