Reported quality indicators and implementation outcomes of community partnership in autism intervention research: A systematic review.

There is minimal research on the quality of community partnerships in studies of interventions for autistic children. However, building high quality community engagement in autism intervention research may improve implementation outcomes. This systematic review examined studies that report community partnership in autism intervention research. A total of 135 articles were identified and 11 of these articles were included in the final review. Community partnership data were extracted using indicators from the conceptual framework for assessing research‐practice partnerships (RPP; Henrick et al., Henrick et al., Assessing research‐practice partnerships: Five dimensions of effectiveness, William T. Grant Foundation, 2017) and implementation outcomes data were extracted using the taxonomy of distinct implementation outcomes (Proctor et al., Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38:65–76, 2011). Quality of studies were appraised using JBIs critical appraisal tools (Munn et al., JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18:2127–2133, 2020). RPP indicators and implementation outcomes were variably reported across studies. RPP indicators and implementation outcomes more likely to be reported were related to building trust, cultivating partnership relationships, conducting rigorous research to inform action, acceptability, and feasibility. RPP indicators and implementation outcomes less likely to be reported were related to building capacity to engage in partnership work, sustainability, cost, and penetration. Together, these results may suggest the need for increased sustainability and capacity building efforts in partnerships and increased guidelines for reporting outcomes. Lay Summary: This paper reviewed autism intervention studies that report partnerships between researchers and community members. The quality of the partnerships and outcomes of implementing the interventions were found to be variably reported. There may be a need for clearer guidelines on reporting outcomes of partnerships between researchers and community members and partnerships may benefit from increased focus on building capacity and sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]