Association between regression and self injury among children with autism.

The team looked at kids with autism who were already in the hospital. They asked parents if the child had ever lost skills after first learning them. Then they counted how often each child hit, bit, or scratched themselves.

They wanted to know: does a history of skill loss mean more self-injury? If it does, doctors could flag those kids early.

Kids who had lost skills did not hurt themselves more than kids who had never lost skills. The rates of head-banging, hair-pulling, and other self-harm were the same in both groups.

In short, a past regression tells us nothing about future self-injury risk.

Warnes et al. (2005) saw the same null link: regression history did not predict later IQ or autism severity. Together, the two studies say, "Look at current skills, not the old story."

Flowers et al. (2020) widened the lens. In 145 autistic teens, higher irritability and lower adaptive skills did predict more self-injury. Their finding extends the 2014 work by showing us where to look instead: today’s behavior, not yesterday’s regression.

Dempsey et al. (2016) adds a warning. Even when we bundle lots of standard scores together, we still explain only 13 % of why self-injury happens. The 2014 null result fits right in: single variables like regression rarely crack the case.

Stop using parent reports of lost words or gestures as a red flag for severe self-injury. Screen every child for self-harm the same way, no matter their early history. Spend your time measuring current irritability, adaptive living skills, and triggers you can see today. That gives you faster, clearer direction for treatment.