ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
Validation of the German Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire in autistic adults.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sensory Reactivity in Autism: Integrating Behavioural, Affective, Physiological, and Neural Dimensions.Current psychiatry reports · 2026Review
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the well-being of autistic and non-autistic adults in Eastern Germany.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe validated the German version of the Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire (GSQ), a self-report questionnaire for adults assessing the processing of stimuli regarding hypo- and hypersensitivity in seven sensory modalities. Since the GSQ is intended for the use in autistic adults, we aimed to complement our previous study on students with high and low Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ; Zeisel et al., BMC Psychiatry 23:426, 2023), by surveying groups of autistic and non-autistic adults, to present the sensory processing profiles of the two groups, to identify the factor structure of the questionnaire in a group of autistic individuals and to identify the diagnostic value of a cut-off score for heightened sensory sensitivity in German autistic adults.
methodsA sample of autistic and non-autistic adults (each n = 86) completed the same German version of the GSQ as used in Zeisel et al. (BMC Psychiatry 23:426, 2023), the AQ and the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised. Factor analyses were applied.
resultsThe German GSQ showed good to excellent reliability. While the factor structure could not be confirmed, main findings of other validation studies were replicated: AQ and GSQ scores were moderately to strongly associated, with higher AQ and GSQ scores for autistic than for non-autistic individuals. Autistic individuals also showed more consistency in their sensitivity across sensory modalities. A third of the autistic participants had heightened sensory sensitivity, when a cut-off was set at the 95th percentile of the non-autism group.
conclusionsOverall, this German version of the GSQ can be considered a validated self-report questionnaire assessing sensory sensitivity particularly in autistic individuals. It can be used to assess sensory sensitivity in the diagnostic process of autism spectrum disorder and to assess an individual's sensory needs and strengths for best possible support. Further studies are required, especially to assess the internal structure of the GSQ.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.