SLPQualitativeAutism : the international journal of research and practice2023

Co-design of an NHS primary care health check for autistic adults.

Helen Taylor, Barry Ingham, David Mason and 15 others

PMID 36409011

WHAT IT FOUND

Participants wanted a co-designed NHS health check for autistic adults to use a pre-appointment questionnaire, flexible reasonable adjustments, biopsychosocial topics, trained staff and supporter involvement.

Fifty-one autistic adults, people with intellectual disabilities, supporters and clinicians took part.

Key findings

01Fifty-one people took part in consultation groups and interviews to co-design the health check.

02The health check comprises a pre-appointment questionnaire and a health check appointment template.

03Participants agreed that reasonable adjustments should be personalised to reflect individual differences in the needs of autistic people.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study reports views on designing a health check, not whether the health check improves outcomes. Participants were only from North East England, so it may not show what autistic adults in other regions want. Ethnicity was not recorded, so it may not capture views of ethnic groups often under-represented in research. Most autistic participants were not asked whether they had an intellectual disability. One consultation group and one interview were not audio recorded, so field notes were used. The research team made final decisions when stakeholder groups disagreed.

Declared interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. The study was funded by the UK autism research charity Autistica and the Peter Sowerby Foundation.

The easy way to misread this

Do not treat this as evidence that the health check improves autistic adults' health. It reports what participants wanted and how the materials were designed, not a trial of outcomes.

Read it on PubMed →