Autism service preferences of parents/guardians and autistic adults in five countries
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Scholars and activists debate whether people on the autism spectrum should access autism-specific services or general/inclusive/mainstream services. This article presents quantitative results from a mixed-methods survey of autistic adults and parents/guardians of autistic people in Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and the United States. Respondents reported categories of services used (autism-specific, mixed-disability, or general/inclusive/mainstream), satisfaction, and overall service preference. Most respondents preferred autism-specific services, followed by different categories of services for different service types. Demographic factors had little influence on overall service preferences. No significant differences were found between adults' and parents/guardians' overall service preferences. For parents/guardians, using autism-specific services was associated with a preference for autism-specific services. There were significant associations between the services respondents reported having previously used and their overall service preference. Parents/guardians in Italy and France reported lower satisfaction with many services. These results suggest that a preference for autism-specific services pervades different groups. While most respondents did endorse autism-specific services, the strong secondary preference for different service categories encourages providers and policy makers to attend to diverse needs. While satisfaction was generally middling to high, there remain areas for improvement, especially in general job training services. General services can use a Universal Design approach and collaborate with autism-specific and mixed-disability services to increase accessibility to diverse populations. The influence of previous service use on preferences suggests that providers can leverage strengths of existing services, leverage and create connections, and ask users about previous experiences to better address their expectations. LAY SUMMARY: This study asked autistic adults and parents/guardians of autistic people what they think about autism services. Most parents/guardians and adults liked services that focus on autism, but many parents/guardians and adults liked them for some things and not others. All services can ask people about services they used in the past and learn from the strengths of good services through Universal Design and working with other services.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».