Post-diagnostic support for adults diagnosed with autism in adulthood in the UK: A systematic review with narrative synthesis.

None of the included studies collected defined outcome data, so the review cannot tell you whether any of these services work. Everything it reports about benefit is what participants said about their own experience. Most evaluations were small and relied on people who chose to take part, so those with strong views either way are likely over-represented. The authors changed their age criterion to 16+ partway through because too few studies were found. 92.78% of participants were of White ethnicity, so the findings may not hold for other groups. Six of the 19 studies were grey literature, which was generally of lower quality, with some reports giving no stated methodology or references. The service map depended on services publishing their information online and keeping it up to date, so it may be incomplete or out of date. The review covered the UK only, so it says nothing about other health systems. Several studies could not establish which specific support each person had received, so reported benefits cannot be tied to one type of support.

The authors declared no conflicts of interest and the work received no formal funding. The third author is supported by the Elizabeth Blackwell Institute at the University of Bristol, the Rosetrees Trust and the Prudence Trust.

Do not read this as evidence that psychoeducation, peer support or one-to-one support services work. The authors state that no included study collected outcome data that would allow efficacy to be assessed. The positive figures come from surveys and interviews with people who chose to take part, and in the largest evaluations it is not known which support each person actually received.