RESUMO
The neuropeptide oxytocin has historically been associated with reproduction and maternal behavior. However, more recent research has uncovered that oxytocin has a much wider range of roles in physiology and behavior. Despite the excitement surrounding potential therapeutical applications of intranasally administered oxytocin, the results of these intervention studies have been inconsistent. Various reasons for these mixed results have been proposed, which tend to focus on methodological issues, such as study design. While methodological issues are certainly important, emerging evidence suggests that the interaction between oxytocin and sex hormones may also account for these varied findings. To better understand the purpose and function of the interaction of oxytocin with sex hormones, with a focus on estrogens, progesterone, and testosterone, we conducted a comprehensive thematic review via four perspectives: evolutionary, developmental, mechanistic, and survival. Altogether, this synergistic approach highlights the critical function of sex hormone activity for accomplishing the diverse roles of oxytocin via the modulation of oxytocin release and oxytocin receptor activity, which is also likely to contribute to the heterogeneity of outcomes after oxytocin administration.
RESUMO
Oxytocin administration has demonstrated considerable promise for providing individualized support for autistic people. However, studies evaluating the effects of oxytocin administration on autistic characteristics have yielded inconsistent results. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the effect of oxytocin administration on social and routinized behaviors in autism using recently developed methods to accurately assess the potential impact of effect size dependency and publication bias. Our frequentist meta-analysis yielded a significant summary effect size estimate for the impact of oxytocin administration on social outcomes in autism (d = 0.22, p < 0.001). The summary effect size estimate for routinized behavior outcomes was not statistically significant (d = 0.14, p = 0.22), with a follow up test indicating that the effect size estimate was not either statistically equivalent (Z = -1.06, p = 0.2), assuming a smallest effect size of interest of 0.25. Frequentist and Bayesian assessments for publication bias, as well as results from Robust Bayesian meta-analysis of oxytocin effects on social outcomes in autism, indicated that summary effect sizes might be inflated due to publication bias. Future studies should aim to reduce bias by preregistering analysis plans and to increase precision with larger sample sizes.
