Diagnosis drift explains autism rise

Apparent increases in autism prevalence are largely an artifact: changes in who counts as autistic (DSM criteria), clinicians' incentives, and how administrative datasets are assembled (age of ascertainment, survival bias) produce a misleading upward trend that can’t be read as a simple rise in underlying incidence. Correct policy responses require separating diagnostic/reporting effects from true causal increases so services and research are targeted appropriately. — If policymakers treat administrative diagnosis trends as raw incidence, they risk misallocating research funding and public services and pursuing wrong causal hypotheses.