Voices for Change: Stakeholder Perspectives on Childhood Diagnostic Delays in Western Australia.
Shane Grundy, Declan R Walter, Lucy M Macloughlin and 2 others
PMID 42687475WHAT IT FOUND
A qualitative survey of 36 parents, educators, and healthcare professionals in Western Australia found that the top concerns about childhood diagnostic delays were funding gaps, specialist wait times of 6 months to 2 years, and communication breakdowns between services.
Key findings
01Support was the most frequently discussed theme across all three stakeholder groups (110 instances, 3.5% coverage), with financial concerns dominant: parents sought personal financial assistance for medical expenses, educators advocated for school funding, and healthcare professionals called for workforce expansion.
02Participants reported specialist appointment wait times ranging from 6 months to 2 years, described consistently as 'unacceptable,' with waitlist length compounded by insufficient healthcare professional availability.
03Communication gaps between healthcare providers, educators, and families emerged as a prominent contributor to diagnostic delay, with parents reporting feeling 'lost' in initial help-seeking and educators describing difficulty communicating developmental concerns to parents sensitively.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
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.
What it does not show
Small sample of 36 participants, 91.7% female, drawn from a single metropolitan region in Western Australia, limiting generalisability to other regions or healthcare systems. Selection bias is likely: those most affected by diagnostic delays were probably more motivated to respond to a survey about that topic. Data were collected via written survey responses rather than interviews, which the authors acknowledge may limit depth; data saturation was not formally assessed because the fixed survey design precluded iterative sampling. No perspectives from children or adolescents who experienced the diagnostic process were included. Eleven of the initial 47 participants completed only demographic items and were excluded, leaving a 77% usable response rate.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest and report no funding source.
The easy way to misread this
This is a qualitative study of what 36 people in one region found frustrating about the diagnostic pathway; it is not evidence that any specific intervention, training programme, or policy change reduces diagnostic delay. The reported wait times of 6 months to 2 years reflect the experiences of these particular participants in the Perth system and should not be read as a benchmark for your own service, nor should the participants' calls for 'early intervention' be treated as evidence that a particular early-intervention programme is effective.