ArticlePloS one2026
'I fit the category of the box, it just doesn't describe me well.' Exploring the perspectives of autistic women and gender-diverse individuals on self-report autism measures.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Psychological assessments play a significant role in both clinical decision-making and the interpretation of research findings, with the quality of these inferences depending on the validity of the measures used. Recent evidence suggests there are gender differences in the presentation of autism, raising concerns about the validity of existing autism tools to measure autistic traits in women and the subsequent implications for clinical inferences and research. This study explored the perspectives of autistic women on the relevance of existing autism questionnaires to their lived experience, alongside additional input from gender-diverse individuals assigned female at birth (AFAB). Through interviews, focus groups, and online surveys, 22 autistic women and AFAB gender-diverse individuals shared their experiences using and perspectives on the Autism Spectrum Quotient-10, 14-item Ritvo Autism & Asperger Diagnostic Scale, and Broad Autism Phenotype Questionnaire. The interview data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, identifying two overarching themes: (1) questionnaires measure only one way to be autistic, and not in an autism-friendly manner, and (2) enhancing questionnaires' relevance for autistic women and individuals socialised as female: key missing experiences to include. The findings suggest that some of the most frequently used autism measures may not fully capture the experiences of autistic women and AFAB gender diverse individuals. Significant gaps were identified, indicating that important aspects of the participants' lived experiences were missing. Furthermore, concerns were raised about the questionnaires' lack of relevance to the autistic population as a whole. The findings underscore the non-satisfactory content validity of these tools for measuring autism in autistic women and AFAB gender-diverse individuals. This highlights the need for their refinement to better reflect contemporary understandings of different presentations of autistic traits, particularly the impact of gendered experiences, in a way that avoids the introduction of possible new biases and remains relevant and accessible to autistic individuals.
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.