Nicolaidis Christina, Scharer Mirah, Raymaker Dora M, Vera Joseph, Edwards Todd, Moura Ian, Baker-Ericzén Mary, Maslak Joelle, Yang Liu-Qin, Kripke-Ludwig Rachel, Kapp Steven K, Joyce Andrea, Wallington Anna
Portland State University, USA.
Oregon Health & Science University, USA.
Autism. 2025 Aug;29(8):1959-1972. doi: 10.1177/13623613251322082. Epub 2025 Jun 5.
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 abstractPeople 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.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.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.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).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.
人们越来越认识到需要通过服务干预来改善成年自闭症患者的生活。然而,对于如何最好地评估此类服务,我们了解得还较少。我们旨在确定:(1)在评估针对成年自闭症患者的服务效果时,哪些自我报告的结果是最需要衡量的;(2)需要哪些调查工具来衡量这些结果。我们在以社区为基础的参与性研究方法中嵌入了一个传统的由研究人员主导的“德尔菲过程”,我们将其称为“基于社区参与性研究的嵌套德尔菲过程”。该过程使我们能够在53位具有专业经验和实际生活经验的专家中达成完全共识,这些专家包括成年自闭症患者、家庭成员、健康和残疾服务提供者、自闭症社区领袖以及研究人员。最终的结果清单包括生活质量、整体健康状况、情绪健康、焦虑、抑郁、自杀倾向、自闭症倦怠、社会支持、就业满意度、社区参与、自主决定权、沟通能力、日常生活活动、对社会服务的满意度以及对医疗服务的满意度。专家们认为,几乎所有用于衡量这些结果的现有工具都需要进行调整,才能用于成年自闭症患者(或代理人)。研究人员和服务提供者应考虑针对这些可衡量的结果进行干预,并使用与成年自闭症患者共同开发的工具对其进行评估。
摘要
人们开始认识到需要提供服务来改善成年自闭症患者的生活。但对于如何最好地评估此类服务,我们了解得还较少。
(1)在评估针对成年自闭症患者的服务效果时,哪些结果是最需要衡量的;(2)如何通过调查成功地衡量这些结果。
我们使用了一种名为“德尔菲过程”的方法,该方法能从许多不同的专家那里获取意见。我们在我们长期开展的基于社区的参与性研究(CBPR)过程中使用了这种方法,以便我们团队的学术成员和社区成员能够共享权力。我们在53位专家中达成了完全共识。这些专家具有作为成年自闭症患者、家庭成员、健康和残疾服务提供者、自闭症社区领袖以及研究人员的专业和/或实际生活经验。
最终的结果清单包括生活质量、整体健康状况、情绪健康、焦虑、抑郁、自杀倾向、自闭症倦怠、社会支持、就业满意度、社区参与、自主决定权、沟通能力、日常生活活动、对社会服务的满意度以及对医疗服务的满意度。专家们认为,几乎所有试图衡量这些结果的现有调查都需要进行调整,才能用于成年自闭症患者(或者在需要时,用于他们的照顾者)。
研究人员和服务提供者应考虑针对这些结果提供服务。他们应该使用为成年自闭症患者并与他们共同创建的调查来评估服务的效果。