Christina Nicolaidis, Mirah Scharer, Dora M Raymaker, Joseph Vera, Todd Edwards, Ian Moura, Mary Baker-Ericzén, Joelle Maslak, et al.
(2025).
Consensus on high-priority outcomes to be used in the evaluation of services for autistic adults: Results from a “CBPR-Nested Delphi Process”.
Autism, 29(8), 1959-1972.
SAGE Publications.
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 abstract Why 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.