Christina Nicolaidis, Mirah Scharer, Dora M Raymaker, Joseph Vera, Todd Edwards, Ian Moura, Mary Baker-Ericzén, Joelle Maslak, Liu-Qin Yang, Rachel Kripke-Ludwig, Steven K Kapp, Andrea Joyce, Anna Wallington
{"title":"Consensus on high-priority outcomes to be used in the evaluation of services for autistic adults: Results from a \"CBPR-Nested Delphi Process\".","authors":"Christina Nicolaidis, Mirah Scharer, Dora M Raymaker, Joseph Vera, Todd Edwards, Ian Moura, Mary Baker-Ericzén, Joelle Maslak, Liu-Qin Yang, Rachel Kripke-Ludwig, Steven K Kapp, Andrea Joyce, Anna Wallington","doi":"10.1177/13623613251322082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>People are increasingly recognizing the need for service interventions to improve the lives of autistic adults. However, less is known about how to best evaluate such services. We aimed to identify (1) which self-reported outcomes are most important to measure when evaluating the effectiveness of services for autistic adults and (2) what survey instruments would be needed to measure them. We nested a traditional researcher-driven \"Delphi process\" within our community-based participatory research approach in what we are calling a \"CBPR-Nested Delphi Process.\" The process allowed us to reach a full consensus among 53 experts with professional and lived experience as autistic adults, family members, health and disability service providers, autism community leaders, and researchers. The final list of outcomes included quality of life, overall health, emotional wellbeing, anxiety, depression, suicidality, autistic burnout, social support, employment satisfaction, community participation, self-determination, access to communication, activities of daily living, satisfaction with social services, and satisfaction with healthcare services. Experts felt almost all available instruments to measure these outcomes would need adaptations to be used with autistic adults (or proxies). Researchers and service providers should consider targeting interventions to these measurable outcomes and evaluating them using instruments that have been co-developed with autistic adults.Lay abstract<b>Why was this project done?</b>People are starting to recognize the need for services to improve the lives of autistic adults. But less is known about how to best evaluate such services.<b>What were the goals of the project?</b>To identify (1) which outcomes are most important to measure when evaluating the effectiveness of services for autistic adults and (2) how we can successfully measure them using surveys.<b>What did the researchers do?</b>We used a method called a \"Delphi process\" that gets input from lots of different experts. We used that method inside our own long-standing community-based participatory research (CBPR) process so that we could share power between the academic and community members of our team. We reached a full consensus (agreement) among 53 experts. These experts had professional and/or lived experience as autistic adults, family members, health and disability service providers, autism community leaders, and researchers.<b>What does this study add?</b>The final list of outcomes included quality of life, overall health, emotional wellbeing, anxiety, depression, suicidality, autistic burnout, social support, employment satisfaction, community participation, self-determination, access to communication, activities of daily living, satisfaction with social services, and satisfaction with healthcare services. Experts felt almost all available surveys that try to measure these outcomes would need adaptations to be used with autistic adults (or if needed, with their caregivers).<b>What are the implications?</b>Researchers and service providers should consider targeting services to these outcomes. They should evaluate the effectiveness of services using surveys that have been created with and for autistic adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":8724,"journal":{"name":"Autism","volume":" ","pages":"13623613251322082"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Autism","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613251322082","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
People are increasingly recognizing the need for service interventions to improve the lives of autistic adults. However, less is known about how to best evaluate such services. We aimed to identify (1) which self-reported outcomes are most important to measure when evaluating the effectiveness of services for autistic adults and (2) what survey instruments would be needed to measure them. We nested a traditional researcher-driven "Delphi process" within our community-based participatory research approach in what we are calling a "CBPR-Nested Delphi Process." The process allowed us to reach a full consensus among 53 experts with professional and lived experience as autistic adults, family members, health and disability service providers, autism community leaders, and researchers. The final list of outcomes included quality of life, overall health, emotional wellbeing, anxiety, depression, suicidality, autistic burnout, social support, employment satisfaction, community participation, self-determination, access to communication, activities of daily living, satisfaction with social services, and satisfaction with healthcare services. Experts felt almost all available instruments to measure these outcomes would need adaptations to be used with autistic adults (or proxies). Researchers and service providers should consider targeting interventions to these measurable outcomes and evaluating them using instruments that have been co-developed with autistic adults.Lay abstractWhy was this project done?People are starting to recognize the need for services to improve the lives of autistic adults. But less is known about how to best evaluate such services.What were the goals of the project?To identify (1) which outcomes are most important to measure when evaluating the effectiveness of services for autistic adults and (2) how we can successfully measure them using surveys.What did the researchers do?We used a method called a "Delphi process" that gets input from lots of different experts. We used that method inside our own long-standing community-based participatory research (CBPR) process so that we could share power between the academic and community members of our team. We reached a full consensus (agreement) among 53 experts. These experts had professional and/or lived experience as autistic adults, family members, health and disability service providers, autism community leaders, and researchers.What does this study add?The final list of outcomes included quality of life, overall health, emotional wellbeing, anxiety, depression, suicidality, autistic burnout, social support, employment satisfaction, community participation, self-determination, access to communication, activities of daily living, satisfaction with social services, and satisfaction with healthcare services. Experts felt almost all available surveys that try to measure these outcomes would need adaptations to be used with autistic adults (or if needed, with their caregivers).What are the implications?Researchers and service providers should consider targeting services to these outcomes. They should evaluate the effectiveness of services using surveys that have been created with and for autistic adults.
期刊介绍:
Autism is a major, peer-reviewed, international journal, published 8 times a year, publishing research of direct and practical relevance to help improve the quality of life for individuals with autism or autism-related disorders. It is interdisciplinary in nature, focusing on research in many areas, including: intervention; diagnosis; training; education; translational issues related to neuroscience, medical and genetic issues of practical import; psychological processes; evaluation of particular therapies; quality of life; family needs; and epidemiological research. Autism provides a major international forum for peer-reviewed research of direct and practical relevance to improving the quality of life for individuals with autism or autism-related disorders. The journal''s success and popularity reflect the recent worldwide growth in the research and understanding of autistic spectrum disorders, and the consequent impact on the provision of treatment and care. Autism is interdisciplinary in nature, focusing on evaluative research in all areas, including: intervention, diagnosis, training, education, neuroscience, psychological processes, evaluation of particular therapies, quality of life issues, family issues and family services, medical and genetic issues, epidemiological research.