Stoppage in Autism Spectrum Disorders.

Au-Yeung et al. (2015) used Denmark’s national birth and health records to see if parents stop having babies after an autism diagnosis. They looked at birth order and timing in families with ASD.

The goal was to measure how much this ‘stoppage’ skews later estimates of autism recurrence risk.

Stoppage happens, but the size of the bias is small. After adjusting for it, sibling recurrence risk barely changes.

In plain words, Danish data are already solid; you need only a tiny math tweak when quoting recurrence figures.

Joyce et al. (1988) first warned that stoppage rules could hide heritability. Au-Yeung et al. (2015) now show the real-world Danish effect is minor—a reassuring update.

Ohan et al. (2015) ran a similar 2015 study in the UK and also found modest bias. Two countries, same year, same answer: stoppage is measurable but not dramatic.

Garrido et al. (2017) pooled data on younger siblings’ early delays. Their meta-analysis accepts stoppage-adjusted risk numbers—exactly the figures K et al. refined.

When you counsel Danish or similar registry-based families, you can trust the published recurrence risks with only a light correction. No need to discard old estimates or over-explain huge bias—just note ‘small stoppage tweak’ and move on to intervention planning.