SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · PPR

High rates of Parkinson’s Disease diagnosis in the autistic population: true co-occurrence or a product of overlapping traits?

· 2025-02-07

DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/gs3u2_v1

Check source for accessPreprintOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Older autistic adult literature is sparse, and little is known about the aging autistic population. However, recent evidence suggests an increased prevalence of Parkinson’s Disease (PD) diagnosis in the autistic population. It may initially be assumed that autistic individuals are genetically more likely to develop PD, but genetic studies do not provide evidence for a strong link between the two conditions. Alternatively, an underappreciated body of evidence may shed light upon why autistic individuals score highly on PD diagnostic criteria: movement differences in autism have been likened to those of PD. Given that PD diagnosis is primarily movement-based, if it is indeed the case that autistic movement appears parkinsonian, this may facilitate autistic individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for PD. If validated, this theory could have serious implications for the specificity of the PD diagnostic process. The current review article sets out the evidence for high rates of PD diagnosis and parkinsonism in the autistic population and subsequently questions why this might be the case, making reference to genetic and behavioural similarities between autism and PD. Overall, this article highlights a potential diagnosis issue that should be further researched and considered by clinicians when conducting diagnostic assessments of movement disorders.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.