A diagnosis of an autism spectrum disorders is usually associated with substantial lifetime costs to an individual, their family and the community. However, there remains an elusive factor in any cost-benefit analysis of ASD diagnosis, namely the cost of not obtaining a diagnosis. Given the infeasibility of estimating the costs of a population that, by its nature, is inaccessible, the current study compares expenses between families whose children received a formal ASD diagnosis immediately upon suspecting developmental atypicality and seeking advice, with families that experienced a delay between first suspicion and formal diagnosis. A register based questionnaire study covering all families with a child with ASD in Western Australia. Families with one or more children diagnosed with an ASD, totalling 521 children diagnosed with an ASD; 317 records were able to be included in the final analysis. The median family cost of ASD was estimated to be AUD $34,900 per annum with almost 90% of the sum ($29,200) due to loss of income from employment. For each additional symptom reported, approximately $1,400 cost for the family per annum was added. While there was little direct influence on costs associated with a delay in the diagnosis, the delay was associated with a modest increase in the number of ASD symptoms, indirectly impacting the cost of ASD. A delay in diagnosis was associated with an indirect increased financial burden to families. Early and appropriate access to early intervention is known to improve a child's long-term outcomes and reduce lifetime costs to the individual, family and society. Consequently, a per symptom dollar value may assist in allocation of individualised funding amounts for interventions rather than a nominal amount allocated to all children below a certain age, regardless of symptom presentation, as is the case in Western Australia.

This article explores the key factors for successful employment from the viewpoints of adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and employers. Two groups of individuals participated in this study, 40 adults with ASD and 35 employers. Q method was used to understand and contrast the viewpoints of the two groups. Data were analysed using by-person varimax rotation factor analysis. Results showed that although both groups appear committed to the employment process, the difference in their understanding regarding the type of workplace support required, job expectations and productivity requirements continues to hinder successful employment. These results highlight the need to facilitate communication between employees and employers to ensure a clear understanding of the needs of both groups are met. The use of an ASD-specific workplace tool may assist in facilitating the necessary communication between these two groups.

The purpose of this review was to build upon a recent review by Weigelt et al. which examined visual search strategies and face identification between individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and typically developing peers. Seven databases, CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, ERIC, Medline, Proquest, PsychInfo and PubMed were used to locate published scientific studies matching our inclusion criteria. A total of 28 articles not included in Weigelt et al. met criteria for inclusion into this systematic review. Of these 28 studies, 16 were available and met criteria at the time of the previous review, but were mistakenly excluded; and twelve were recently published. Weigelt et al. found quantitative, but not qualitative, differences in face identification in individuals with ASD. In contrast, the current systematic review found both qualitative and quantitative differences in face identification between individuals with and without ASD. There is a large inconsistency in findings across the eye tracking and neurobiological studies reviewed. Recommendations for future research in face recognition in ASD were discussed.

“Why are neurotypicals so pig-ignorant about autism?” an autistic person wrote on the Curtin Autism Research Group’s on-line portal as a response to a call for research questions. Co-produced with an autistic researcher, knowledge about and attitudes towards autism were analysed from 1,054 completed surveys, representing the Australian neurotypical adult population. The majority, 81.5% of participants had a high level of knowledge and 81.3% of participants had a strong positive attitude towards autism. Neither age, nor education level had an impact on attitudes. However, attitudes were influenced by knowledge about ‘Societal Views and Ideas’; ‘What it Could be Like to Have Autism’; and the demographic variables ‘Knowing and having spent time around someone with autism’; and gender (women having more positive attitudes than men). Thus, targeted interventions, geared more towards men than women, to increase knowledge about autism could further improve attitudes and increase acceptance of the autistic community.

Children with autism spectrum conditions (ASC) increasingly participate in inclusive education. The present study reviewed studies of children with ASC for parents’ perceptions of aspects they believed contributed to inclusive mainstream school settings. Understanding the parental perspective on the facilitators for inclusion of their child with ASC in mainstream schools is likely to improve inclusive practice. Twenty-eight empirical articles revealed that parents perceived teachers as playing a vital role in the inclusion of their children with ASC. The school was considered important in creating an environment that enabled inclusion, particularly through positive peer relations, prevention of bullying and help from support staff. At the societal level, funding and legislative policies were considered important. By understanding these aspects, policy-makers, teachers, school administrators and therapists may better be able to address parents’ inclusion concerns and thereby develop strategies to improve inclusion in mainstream schools.