Adult Clinical Outcomes, Diagnostic Loss and Predictors in Individuals Diagnosed With Autism in Childhood.

Özmeral Erarkadaş et al. (2026) asked 74 adults with autism about their daily living skills. All needed high support and lived in a residential facility.

The team checked if age, language, IQ, or general health linked to how well the adults cooked, cleaned, and managed money.

Age and language skill did not matter. Good medical health and an IQ between 55 and 65 did matter.

Adults in that IQ window showed stronger everyday skills than peers with lower or higher scores.

Clarke et al. (2025) tracked the same group long-term. They found kids with IQ under 70 gain the most when you teach personal skills like tooth-brushing. Kids with IQ over 70 gain more from community skills like ordering food. Kübra’s narrow IQ band of 55-65 sits in the sweet spot where both teams see clear payoff.

Tillmann et al. (2019) showed social-communication symptoms hurt adaptive skills more than sensory or mood issues. Kübra’s adults echo this: language did not predict outcome, but the social-cognitive band captured by IQ 55-65 did.

Richman et al. (2001) warned that autistic kids score lower on daily living than IQ-matched peers with ID alone. Kübra agrees: even within autism, IQ still shapes adult skills, so the gap never closes without direct teaching.

If you serve high-support adults, schedule annual health check-ups first. Then write goals for clients near IQ 55-65; they have the best shot at learning laundry, meal prep, and bus riding. Do not wait for language gains to improve life skills—target the skills directly.