Communicating about Autism: Translating and Sharing Research Evidence with Community Audiences

Thursday, May 17, 2012
Sheraton Hall (Sheraton Centre Toronto)
1:00 PM
J. Jivraj1, C. Piatt1, M. Viau2, L. Zwaigenbaum1, M. Elsabbagh3, D. B. Nicholas4 and E. Fombonne5, (1)University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada, (2)Autism Research Training Program, Montreal, QC, Canada, (3)Centre for Brain and Cognitive Development, Birkbeck, London, United Kingdom, (4)University of Calgary, Edmonton, AB, Canada, (5)Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
Background:

The Common Slides Project (CSP) is a knowledge translation project intended to increase awareness of autism research evidence among diverse audiences in the community (e.g., parent groups, teachers). Leveraging the expertise of a national Autism Research Training (ART) Program, an online set of presentation materials were developed to serve as a resource for trainees to tailor to specific audiences.

Objectives:

(1) Conduct a formative evaluation of the clarity and relevance of the CSP presentation materials; and (2) reflect on the process of developing presentation materials with diverse autism stakeholders.

Methods:

ART trainees and faculty collaboratively developed slide sets introducing autism, and describing first signs, prevalence, genetics, and risk factors. Quantitative and qualitative feedback was obtained from three groups in Edmonton, Alberta: (a) clinicians, researchers and advocates (n=25), and (b) two groups of psychology undergraduates (n=15, n=8). The first two groups evaluated each slide, and the third group rated presentations as a whole. Participants provided ratings on statements about the clarity, relevance and appropriateness of the materials using a 5-point scale (where 0 = strongly disagree and 4 = strongly agree) and made additional suggestions on how the slides/presentations could be improved.

Feedback on the slide development process was collected at a national forum with representatives from ASD stakeholder groups, trainees, and faculty.

Results:

The first two groups rated individual slides, and generally agreed that “The message was clear” (M=3.08, SD=.18; M=3.35, SD=.33). Supplementary comments provided constructive input on how to refine the slides. For example, a slide designed to illustrate a team-based approach to treating ASD by including a family at the centre, and clinical groups radiating around the family elicited critiques from three respondents who noted that the “figure makes it look like the family is separate from, rather than part of the team.”

The third group rated the overall presentation.  Respondents agreed that the “Messages on the slides were clear” (M= 3.75, SD=.46) and “The presentation influenced my ideas and attitudes about ASDs” (M=3.38, SD=.74) noting the relevance of information on “genes regarding the cause of autism” and “studies… on vaccines, gluten, parental ages, etc.”

The following considerations for enhancing the process of developing the CSP emerged at the national stakeholder forum: 1) Slide presentations should be developed in partnership with mentors from among community stakeholders who offer expertise in developing engaging personal narratives and insight into community preferences. 2) The paradigm should be shifted from a dissemination model to a public engagement model to allow for two-way exchange and learning between researchers and stakeholders.

Conclusions:

The CSP is a collaborative venture undertaken by trainees of the ART Program. In view of the wide gap between research advances and the integration of emerging evidence into community practice, this knowledge translation project continues to rely on input and evaluation at every stakeholder level to produce meaningful, accurate, and accessible materials. Trainees play a crucial role in mediating the relationship between science and society and develop sensitive communication strategies to bridge this divide.

| More