SynthesisNature human behaviour2026
Social functioning in autism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Nature human behaviour, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Atypical social functioning is a core feature of autism, yet findings remain fragmented across components and development. We aimed to systematically integrate this literature and characterize the organization, development and moderators of social functioning in autism. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of behavioural studies published between January 1990 and August 2025, identified through PubMed, Web of Science and prior reviews, including studies with clinically diagnosed autistic individuals and neurotypical controls. A qualitative synthesis and two complementary quantitative meta-analyses were performed, with risk of bias evaluated through study-level characteristics. A total of 2,622 studies (94,114 autistic and 172,847 neurotypical individuals across 32 countries) were included, covering 22 social components that clustered into five domains. Overall group differences were substantial (Hedges' g = -0.744; 95% confidence interval, (-0.797, -0.690)). Differences emerged the earliest in motivation-based processes (around six months), followed by motor, emotion and inference domains, and showed age-related divergence alongside improvement in some skills. Cross-domain analyses revealed stronger interdependencies in autism and an organizational pattern most consistent with serial relationships among domains. These findings should be interpreted in the light of methodological heterogeneity, underpowered samples and uneven cultural representation. Together, the results provide an integrative framework for understanding the organization and development of social functioning in autism, with implications for precision subtyping, developmentally timed interventions and neurodiversity-informed research and policy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42120904What 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.