Abstract
Background Racially and ethnically minoritized (minoritized) autistic individuals face intersectional disparities in services access in the transition to adulthood. Our understanding of disparities is limited by systematic exclusion from research and inadequate approaches to characterizing services. To address these gaps and effect advocacy, this study: 1) examined services received, unmet service needs, and barriers in minoritized autistic adolescents and adults, and 2) determined if language, NVIQ, and autism traits predict services when deployed as binary or continuous variables.
Method Academic and community partners tailored CBPR to a local context. Participants (N = 73, ages 13-30) completed a behavioral assessment protocol. Participants and caregivers provided information on services received, unmet service needs, and barriers to services. Data were analyzed using descriptives and regression.
Results Participants received multiple services yet had multiple unmet service needs and barriers. Effects of services differed by approach. Language impairment, but not language scores, predicted receiving more services. High levels of autism traits and autism trait scores predicted more unmet service needs.
Implications While the number of services and unmet service needs were similar to prior work, differences in individual service variables and effects support attention to heterogeneity. Findings support intersectional approaches to CBPR and autism research.
Learning outcomes After reading the article, the learner will be able to: 1) summarize knowledge gaps about access to services; 2) explain the relevance of tailoring CBPR to a local context; and 3) describe implications of findings for clinicians and autistic individuals.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by an American Speech-Language-Hearing Foundation New Investigators Research Grant (PI: Girolamo).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB of University of Connecticut gave ethical approval for this work. IRB of San Diego State University gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Authors: Alicia Escobedo, aescobedo4259{at}sdsu.edu, Kyle Greene-Pendelton, kyle{at}sankofaspeech.com, Samantha Ghali: samantha.ghali{at}ku.edu, Iván Campos, icamposslp{at}gmail.com, Poornima Ram-Kiran, prk14{at}uw.edu
We significantly revised them manuscript following reviewer comments, including: 1) increased detail regarding the participatory research methods, 2) greater information about our conceptual framework of race, disability, and language impairment, 3) summary of unmet service needs, service utilization, and barriers, 4) study procedures, 5) participant demographics, 6) study limitations, and 7) selection criteria.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are unavailable due to participants opting not to share their de-identified data in a dynamic consent process.
