Neuropsychology Strengths-Based Approach for the Assessment of Autism in Adults: Qualitative Thematic Analysis of Clients' Experiences of the Diagnosis and Feedback Process.
Adults feel respected when autism testing highlights strengths, but they still need short feedback and a clear support plan before discharge.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Jackson et al. (2025) interviewed 10 adult inpatients right after they went through a new autism check-up.
The assessment talked about brain strengths and used neurodiversity language instead of deficit words.
Each person shared how they felt during testing and when staff gave the results.
What they found
Every adult said the strengths focus felt respectful and hopeful.
They still got tired from bright lights and long talks, and they wanted shorter, clearer feedback.
All asked for written next-step supports before leaving the hospital.
How this fits with other research
Huang et al. (2020) mapped adult autism research and found most clinics skip follow-up care. A et al. show one ward that fixes this by adding strength talk, matching the call for better service.
Lineberry et al. (2023) asked 423 UK adults and families what should happen after diagnosis. Less than a large share got any help within a year. A et al. echo the same need, turning the wish into a ward routine: give a support list at discharge.
Lee et al. (2020) worked with teens and parents in a strengths STEAM club. Parents saw happier, more social kids. A et al. move the idea upstream: start the strengths talk during assessment, not after, so adults leave with pride, not just a label.
Why it matters
You can copy the strengths frame today. Swap “deficit” for “difference,” list client talents, and hand out a one-page support sheet before they go. It costs nothing and may cut their stress and your no-show rate.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →End each autism feedback session with a written strengths list and three local support contacts.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Investigate the utility of a neuropsychological strengths-based approach to the assessment of Autism in adults; to determine the acceptability of the approach and feedback provided to clients; and gather information about improving the assessment process for future clients. The approach was grounded in a neurodiversity-positive framework, providing diagnosis-affirming care. Participants were inpatient clients of the neuropsychology service of a private adult, mental health treatment service. A structured, qualitative, interview framework and thematic analysis was employed, with questions focused on clients' experience of the assessment process, recommendations for improvements and utility of the feedback provided. Ten adult clients with Autism participated (83% participation rate). All participants described having a positive experience with the assessment, from the information pre-assessment, to the assessment tasks, and the clinicians' approach. Several hampering or challenging factors were also reported, including sensory challenges and mental fatigue. Most found the feedback process a positive experience. Suggestions for improving the feedback included simplification and individualisation of the information provided, and ensuring access to multiple and extended feedback sessions. Some clients conceptualised the assessment as part of their Autism identification journey and some found the concept of neurodiversity helpful. Strengths-based neuropsychology assessments, grounded in a neurodiversity-positive framework, were acceptable for adult inpatient participants recently diagnosed with Autism. All reported positive sentiments about the assessment, in addition to helpful adjustments to improve the process. Gaps were identified in opportunities to access Autism specific support following diagnosis. A number of recommendations are provided to assist neuropsychologists conducting Autism assessments for adults.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2025 · doi:10.24818/RMCI.2018.1.15