Ableism in Healthcare for Neurodivergent Adults

You finally make the appointment, organise what you need to say and arrive prepared. Then the waiting room overwhelms you, the doctor asks several broad questions at once and your carefully prepared explanation disappears.

You leave with advice that does not address the problem. Perhaps your physical symptoms are attributed to anxiety, your communication is treated as resistance or your support needs are dismissed because you appear articulate.

This article examines how ableism can operate across healthcare systems, clinical interactions and service design. It also explains what more accessible care looks like and how neurodivergent adults can advocate for themselves without accepting responsibility for fixing the entire system.

🧩 What Ableism in Healthcare Means

Ableism in healthcare occurs when services, clinical assumptions or professional practices treat one way of communicating, processing information, expressing pain or managing appointments as the normal and credible standard.

People who can speak quickly, describe symptoms in the expected order, tolerate uncertainty and remain regulated in clinical environments may find it easier to receive appropriate care. Neurodivergent patients can be disadvantaged when their needs or presentation differ from those expectations.

Healthcare ableism can be obvious. A professional may mock a diagnosis, refuse a reasonable adjustment or speak to an adult as if they were a child.

It can also be less visible:

📞 appointments can only be booked by telephone
📝 forms demand long written explanations without guidance
⏳ unpredictable waiting is treated as unavoidable and unimportant
🗣️ rapid spoken communication is assumed to be the most reliable form
🎧 sensory distress is interpreted as poor behaviour
🧠 executive difficulties are treated as noncompliance
🩺 unusual pain expression is treated as evidence that pain is not serious
🤝 support people are either excluded entirely or addressed instead of the patient

Not every inaccessible interaction is deliberately discriminatory. A professional may be rushed, poorly trained or limited by the service in which they work.

Intent still does not determine impact. A system can create unequal access without any individual deciding to exclude neurodivergent people.

🚪 Ableism Can Begin Before the Appointment

Healthcare access is often discussed as though it begins when a clinician enters the room. For many neurodivergent adults, the first barriers appear much earlier.

A person may need to:

📞 recognise that a symptom deserves medical attention
🗓️ book through a specific communication channel
📄 complete paperwork
🧭 identify the correct service
🚌 plan transport and timing
🧠 remember the appointment
📋 organise symptoms into a concise account
🔄 manage changes, delays or referrals
📩 follow up when nobody responds

Every step requires executive functioning, communication and tolerance of uncertainty.

A person with ADHD may repeatedly intend to make an appointment but struggle to initiate the call, retain information from the conversation or complete the next administrative step. An autistic person may find an unpredictable phone conversation or unclear referral pathway particularly difficult.

When access depends on completing this chain without support, the service may interpret failure as lack of motivation.

The patient may instead conclude:

💬 “If I really needed help, I would have managed to arrange it.”

Need and administrative access are not the same thing.

Articles about why neurodivergent adults miss appointments and why life administration feels so difficult explore this access burden in greater practical detail.

🗣️ Communication Differences Can Be Mistaken for Clinical Information

Healthcare consultations depend heavily on communication. Problems arise when a particular communication style is treated as evidence about the patient’s honesty, intelligence, emotional state or medical condition.

A neurodivergent patient may:

🧠 need extra processing time before answering
📄 communicate more accurately in writing
🔍 provide extensive detail before identifying the central point
💬 interpret a broad question literally
🌫️ lose access to words under stress
👁️ make little eye contact or unusually intense eye contact
🎭 appear calm because they are masking
🔁 repeat information when they are unsure it has been understood
🧊 become quiet, agreeable or unable to correct the clinician

None of these behaviours automatically indicates confusion, exaggeration, poor insight or lack of concern.

A clinician may ask, “How have you been feeling lately?” The patient may not know whether this refers to physical symptoms, mood, sleep or the reason for the appointment. A more specific question could produce a much more useful answer.

Communication is shared work. When two people use different styles, the solution should not automatically be for the patient to imitate the clinician more successfully.

Accessible communication may include:

📋 one question at a time
🕰️ additional response time
✍️ written information before or after the appointment
🎯 concrete wording
🔎 clarification without judgement
📩 permission to send key information in advance
🧾 a written summary of the plan

These adjustments improve the quality of information available to the professional. They are not merely comfort measures.

🎭 Looking Fine Can Hide the Cost of Access

Healthcare professionals usually see a brief section of a person’s day.

They may see someone who arrived on time, spoke politely and explained their concerns. They do not necessarily see the preparation, support and recovery required to make that possible.

The patient may have:

📝 rehearsed the conversation repeatedly
🤝 relied on another person to book the appointment
🚕 paid for easier transport because public transport was unmanageable
💊 delayed medication or food to follow unclear instructions
🎭 suppressed distress throughout the consultation
🛏️ needed the rest of the day to recover
📵 become unable to complete follow up tasks afterward

Visible performance can therefore be mistaken for low support need.

This is particularly common among late diagnosed and highly masking adults. Their competence may be real, but it does not mean the environment is accessible or the effort is sustainable.

The article on talking to professionals who do not understand neurodivergence provides scripts for situations in which outward competence is being used to dismiss genuine difficulty.

🎧 Sensory Barriers Are Healthcare Barriers

Waiting rooms, clinics, dental practices and hospitals can combine intense sensory demands:

💡 fluorescent or bright lighting
🔊 televisions, alarms, phones and overlapping conversations
🧴 disinfectant, perfume and medical smells
🪑 uncomfortable seating
🌡️ unpredictable temperature
👥 close physical proximity
🩺 unexpected touch
🚪 doors opening and closing
⏳ delays without clear information

Sensory strain can reduce access to language, working memory, flexible thinking and emotional regulation. The patient may enter the consultation with less capacity than they had when preparing at home.

This can affect the medical interaction itself. Someone may forget a symptom, agree too quickly, misunderstand instructions or appear unusually distressed.

Sensory distress is sometimes treated as separate from healthcare quality, as though the clinical care can be good even when the patient cannot process it.

That distinction is misleading. An environment that prevents a patient from communicating or understanding information is affecting the care.

Research involving autistic adults consistently identifies sensory conditions as an important access barrier, alongside communication and planning difficulties (Mason et al., 2019; Strömberg et al., 2022).

Useful adjustments may include:

🔕 waiting somewhere quieter
🗓️ booking the first or last appointment
💡 reducing light where possible
🎧 permitting headphones or ear protection
🚪 allowing the patient to wait outside until called
🩺 explaining touch and procedures before they occur
⏱️ giving realistic updates during delays

For hospital specific preparation, see Hospital Visits for Neurodivergent Adults.

🩺 When Symptoms Are Not Expressed in the Expected Way

Clinical assessment often depends on how symptoms are described and displayed.

A patient who speaks calmly may be assumed to have mild pain. Someone who cannot rank pain on a numerical scale may be considered unreliable. A person who gives a detailed explanation may be interpreted as anxious or fixated.

Neurodivergent people may experience or communicate internal states differently. Interoceptive differences can make it difficult to identify, locate or categorise sensations. Stress may further reduce access to this information.

A person might know that something is wrong without knowing whether the sensation is:

🔥 burning
🪨 pressure
🌀 dizziness
🌫️ fatigue
🧊 numbness
🤢 nausea
⚡ pain
💓 internal agitation

Pain expression also varies. Someone may become quiet, laugh, speak technically or show little change in facial expression. Another person may become highly distressed by a procedure that is considered routine.

Neither presentation provides a simple measure of severity.

Clinicians need to separate the style of expression from the content being communicated. They can ask concrete questions about location, timing, changes, functional impact and observable patterns rather than relying mainly on expected emotional cues.

The article on interoception and neurodivergence explains why internal body signals may be delayed, intense or difficult to interpret.

🌫️ Diagnostic Overshadowing and Premature Explanations

Diagnostic overshadowing occurs when an existing diagnosis influences how new symptoms are interpreted, causing other possible explanations to receive insufficient attention.

For a neurodivergent adult, this may happen when:

🧠 cognitive changes are attributed to ADHD without checking sleep, medication or physical illness
🌧️ pain or fatigue is attributed to anxiety
🎧 distress during an examination is attributed to autism rather than the procedure
🔥 reduced functioning is described as depression without considering burnout or medical causes
💊 side effects are dismissed as emotional sensitivity
🗣️ communication difficulty is mistaken for lack of understanding or capacity

Autism, ADHD and anxiety can affect health experiences. They should remain relevant clinical information.

The problem is allowing one explanation to end the assessment too early.

A physical symptom can be affected by anxiety and still need medical investigation. A person can have executive dysfunction and a new neurological problem. An autistic person can experience both sensory distress and significant physical pain.

Good clinical reasoning asks:

🔎 What does the existing diagnosis explain?
🧩 What does it not explain?
📈 What has changed from the person’s baseline?
🩺 Which common or serious possibilities still need consideration?
🧪 What evidence would support or weaken each explanation?

The opposite error can also occur. Professionals may focus only on physical symptoms and fail to recognise neurodivergence, overload or communication needs.

The aim is not to attribute nothing to neurodivergence. It is to avoid using neurodivergence as a complete explanation before adequate assessment has occurred.

🪞 Credibility Can Be Unevenly Distributed

A central form of healthcare ableism concerns whose account is considered credible.

Neurodivergent adults may be doubted because they:

🎭 do not appear distressed enough
🌊 appear too distressed
📚 have researched their symptoms extensively
🌫️ struggle to provide a clear chronology
🗣️ use clinical language
🧊 become quiet under pressure
🔄 change an earlier answer after processing the question
🤝 bring a supporter
📝 arrive with written notes

The same behaviour can be interpreted in contradictory ways. Detailed knowledge may be labelled fixation, while limited detail is treated as poor insight. A calm presentation may be seen as evidence that symptoms are minor, while emotional expression is attributed to anxiety.

This creates a credibility trap.

Research on autistic healthcare has described how communication mismatch, professional doubt and patients’ growing doubt in their own judgement can contribute to delayed care and avoidance (Shaw et al., 2024).

A clinician does not need to accept every proposed explanation without evaluation. They do need to take the reported experience seriously enough to investigate it fairly.

Respectful scepticism examines evidence. Dismissal rejects the patient before the evidence has been gathered.

🧠 Mental Healthcare Can Reproduce the Same Barriers

Mental healthcare is not automatically neurodiversity affirming.

A therapist or psychiatrist may understand mood and anxiety while having limited knowledge of autism, ADHD, sensory processing or masking. Standard treatment may then be applied without considering why the person is distressed.

Examples include:

🧘 treating sensory overload mainly as anxious avoidance
📋 assigning complex self monitoring homework without executive support
👥 pushing social exposure without examining communication mismatch or recovery cost
🎭 praising increased masking as improved social functioning
⏱️ interpreting missed appointments as resistance
🗣️ insisting on spontaneous emotional language as the main route to insight
🔥 treating burnout as a simple motivation problem

Evidence based treatment still needs adaptation. The underlying principles of therapy may remain useful while pacing, communication, goals and delivery change.

For example, anxiety treatment may need to distinguish fear based avoidance from avoidance of genuine sensory pain. Executive strategies may require external structures rather than relying on intention alone. Trauma work may need greater predictability and control over pacing.

Neurodiversity affirming care does not mean that professionals must agree with every community explanation. It means that neurodivergent traits and access needs are considered relevant rather than treated as obstacles to proper therapy.

💊 ADHD Stigma Can Affect Diagnosis and Treatment

Adults seeking ADHD assessment or treatment may face a different set of assumptions.

They may be told:

💬 “Everyone struggles to concentrate.”
💬 “You finished university, so it cannot be ADHD.”
💬 “You are just looking for stimulants.”
💬 “You only need better discipline.”
💬 “Adults grow out of it.”

Concerns about careful diagnosis and safe prescribing are legitimate. ADHD symptoms overlap with sleep problems, mood conditions, trauma, substance use, medical conditions and other forms of neurodivergence.

Careful assessment is not the same as approaching every patient as deceptive.

Stigma may make adults reluctant to disclose ADHD, ask about medication or seek assessment. A recent systematic review found that perceived and internalised ADHD stigma were associated with treatment barriers, negative self labelling and reduced quality of life, although the available research remains limited and structural stigma has received relatively little direct study (Krishnamoorthy et al., 2026).

Responsible ADHD care requires both clinical caution and respect.

👥 Support People, Autonomy and Consent

A support person can help someone remember information, communicate under stress, travel safely or complete follow up tasks.

Healthcare professionals sometimes make one of two errors.

They may exclude the supporter even when the patient wants assistance. Alternatively, they may speak mainly to the supporter and stop treating the neurodivergent adult as the central decision maker.

Support and autonomy are not opposites.

A clinician can ask:

💬 “How would you like this person to be involved?”
💬 “Would you like to answer first, or would you prefer support?”
💬 “Should I provide the plan to both of you?”
💬 “Would a pause help before you decide?”

The adult should be addressed directly unless there is a clear reason not to do so. Communication differences, reduced speech or the use of alternative communication do not automatically remove decision making capacity.

Consent also requires accessible information. A patient cannot make a meaningful decision when explanations are rushed, ambiguous or delivered while they are too overloaded to process them.

⚖️ Ableism Does Not Operate Alone

Neurodivergent adults may also encounter racism, sexism, transphobia, weight stigma, poverty, ageism and discrimination related to physical or psychiatric disability.

These influences can change whose pain is believed, who receives an assessment, which behaviour is seen as threatening and who is expected to cope without support.

A white, verbally fluent autistic adult with financial resources may encounter significant healthcare barriers while still having forms of access that another autistic person does not have.

Similarly, a person’s ADHD may be overlooked because their behaviour does not fit gendered or racialised stereotypes. Another person may have understandable distress interpreted as aggression because of how others perceive their identity.

An intersectional perspective does not suggest that every poor interaction has one identifiable discriminatory cause. It asks professionals and organisations to notice how several assumptions may operate at once.

🔄 How Healthcare Barriers Become a Harmful Cycle

Healthcare ableism often creates a repeating sequence:

🚪 access requires executive and communication effort
🌊 the patient reaches the appointment already overloaded
🗣️ communication becomes less precise under pressure
🩺 the professional receives incomplete or atypically expressed information
🌫️ symptoms are minimised, misread or explained too quickly
💔 the patient leaves without useful support
📵 future help seeking feels more threatening
⏳ care is delayed until symptoms become more serious
🏥 the eventual situation requires more urgent or complex treatment

The delayed presentation may then be used to judge the patient:

💬 “Why did you wait so long?”

This focuses on the final behaviour while ignoring the barriers that shaped it.

In a large online cross sectional study, 80 percent of autistic respondents reported difficulty visiting a general practitioner, compared with 37 percent of nonautistic respondents. Reported barriers included deciding whether symptoms warranted care, telephone booking, not feeling understood, communication and waiting room conditions. Greater barriers were also associated with self reported adverse health consequences (Doherty et al., 2022).

The study cannot establish every causal step, and its online sample may not represent all autistic adults. It does show why access cannot be reduced to simply telling people to seek help earlier.

🌱 What Neurodiversity Affirming Healthcare Looks Like

Neurodiversity affirming care recognises neurodivergence as relevant to access, communication and clinical reasoning without reducing the person to a diagnostic label.

It is based on individual needs rather than stereotypes.

A neurodiversity affirming professional may:

🧠 ask how the patient processes information best
📝 accept written communication
🎧 consider sensory conditions
🩺 investigate physical symptoms without premature attribution
🗣️ use direct and specific language
⏳ provide processing time
📋 make the next steps explicit
🤝 include a supporter according to the patient’s preferences
🔎 recognise that competence and support need can coexist
🌱 treat accommodations as tools for accurate care

They also remain willing to acknowledge uncertainty.

A professional does not need to be an expert in every neurotype to provide respectful care. Curiosity, clear communication and readiness to adapt can prevent many common problems.

🛠️ Practical Advocacy Without Making the Patient Responsible for the System

The responsibility for accessible healthcare belongs primarily to services and professionals. Patients should not need exceptional communication skills to receive ordinary care.

Personal preparation may still reduce risk within the system that currently exists.

📄 Prepare a Short Healthcare Note

A short document can include:

🎯 the main concern
📅 when it began and what has changed
💊 current medication
⚠️ allergies or significant reactions
🧠 relevant diagnoses
🗣️ communication preferences
🎧 sensory needs
🤝 the role of a support person
📋 the most important questions

Keep the main medical concern near the top. Long background information can be attached separately when needed.

💬 Use Direct Clarification Scripts

Useful phrases include:

💬 “I understand anxiety may contribute, but what physical causes have been considered?”
💬 “This is different from my usual baseline.”
💬 “I need one question at a time so I can answer accurately.”
💬 “I communicate more clearly in writing. Please read the note before we continue.”
💬 “Could you explain what happens next, including who contacts whom?”
💬 “Please document that I requested this assessment and the reason it was not recommended.”

These scripts do not guarantee a better response. They can make the point of disagreement clearer and create a more accurate record.

🧾 Request Concrete Adjustments

Possible requests include:

📩 email or online booking
🕰️ the first appointment of the day
🔕 a quieter place to wait
✍️ written instructions
⏳ more processing time
🩺 advance explanation before touch
🤝 permission for a supporter to attend
📞 an agreed alternative to unexpected telephone calls

A formal diagnosis may be required for certain legal or organisational accommodations, depending on location. Many basic communication adjustments can still be provided without one.

🔎 Seek Review When Necessary

A second opinion may be appropriate when symptoms remain unexplained, the assessment was clearly incomplete or communication barriers prevented an adequate consultation.

Depending on the healthcare system, other options may include speaking with a practice manager, patient advocate, disability liaison, complaints service or professional regulator.

Not every disagreement indicates discrimination or poor care. Medicine contains uncertainty, and professionals may reasonably recommend observation rather than immediate testing.

The concern is whether the decision was clinically explained, based on relevant information and reached through an accessible process.

🏗️ What Healthcare Services Need to Change

Individual advocacy cannot solve inaccessible service design.

Healthcare organisations can reduce barriers through relatively practical changes:

📱 offer several ways to book and confirm appointments
📄 make forms clear, structured and available in advance
🗓️ allow patients to communicate key needs before arrival
🔕 provide quieter waiting options
⏱️ communicate delays
🧠 train all staff, including reception and administration
🗣️ record communication preferences in an accessible place
📋 provide written care plans and follow up instructions
🤝 clarify how supporters can participate
🔄 improve continuity between professionals
📊 include neurodivergent patients in service evaluation and design

Training should go beyond a list of autism or ADHD traits. Staff need to understand that communication is relational, support needs are individual and visible calm does not necessarily indicate low distress.

An online healthcare toolkit developed through community partnered research showed that personalised accommodation information could improve communication and healthcare self efficacy. The evaluation was preliminary and did not establish that a toolkit alone can remove systemic barriers, but it demonstrated the usefulness of structured, patient specific information (Nicolaidis et al., 2016).

Accessibility should not depend on finding one unusually understanding professional. It needs to survive staff changes, referrals and periods when the patient has less capacity to advocate.

🔬 What Research Currently Supports

Research on neurodivergent healthcare ableism is uneven. Most detailed evidence concerns autistic adults, while direct research on structural healthcare barriers for adults with ADHD is less developed.

Studies and reviews consistently identify communication differences, sensory conditions, executive demands, limited professional knowledge, inflexible systems and stigma as healthcare barriers for autistic adults (Mason et al., 2019; Calleja et al., 2020; Mazurek et al., 2023).

More recent qualitative work continues to report difficulties finding suitable providers, communicating needs and obtaining individualised care. Participants also describe practical facilitators that can often be implemented at low cost, such as clearer communication, quieter environments and support for appointments (Stein Duker et al., 2025).

The evidence does not show that every negative medical interaction is caused by ableism. It does support treating accessibility as part of healthcare quality rather than as an optional extra.

🪞 Reflection Questions

🏥 At which point does healthcare usually become least accessible for you: recognising the need, booking, waiting, communicating, completing follow up or returning after a bad experience?
🗣️ Which parts of your communication or distress have professionals misunderstood, and what would help them interpret you more accurately?
🛠️ Which one service change or accommodation would most improve your ability to receive timely and useful care?

🌿 Conclusion: Accessible Care Produces Better Clinical Information

Healthcare ableism is not limited to openly prejudiced professionals. It can be built into booking systems, waiting rooms, communication expectations, diagnostic assumptions and definitions of a credible patient.

These barriers do more than make appointments unpleasant. They can change which symptoms are reported, how professionals interpret them, whether follow up occurs and how long someone waits before seeking help again.

Neurodivergent people should not need to appear neurotypical in order to receive accurate care.

Accessible healthcare does not remove clinical judgement. It improves the information on which that judgement depends. Clear questions, sensory adjustments, written communication, adequate investigation and respect for individual presentation allow professionals to understand the patient more accurately.

Personal preparation and advocacy can reduce some risks, but the central responsibility remains with healthcare organisations and professionals. Patients cannot accommodate themselves out of every inaccessible system.

The goal is not special treatment. It is healthcare in which communication differences, executive needs, sensory access and neurodivergent ways of expressing distress do not become reasons to receive less careful care.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

🏥 What is healthcare ableism?

Healthcare ableism occurs when disabled or neurodivergent people receive poorer access, communication, credibility or treatment because services are designed around other ways of functioning. It can involve individual prejudice, clinical assumptions or structural barriers.

🧩 How is ableism different from poor bedside manner?

Poor bedside manner can affect any patient and may involve rudeness or weak communication. Ableism specifically disadvantages someone because of disability, neurodivergence, support needs or differences in communication and functioning. The two can overlap.

📄 Can I request healthcare accommodations without a formal diagnosis?

You can request communication or sensory adjustments regardless of diagnosis. Whether a service is legally required to provide a specific formal accommodation depends on local law and organisational policy. Many useful changes, such as written instructions or a quieter wait, do not require extensive resources.

🌫️ Is diagnostic overshadowing the same as misdiagnosis?

Not exactly. Diagnostic overshadowing is the process through which an existing diagnosis receives too much explanatory weight. It can contribute to a missed or incorrect diagnosis, but it can also cause inadequate investigation without producing a specific alternative diagnosis.

🫀 Why do I struggle to describe symptoms during appointments?

Pain, stress, interoceptive differences, sensory overload and time pressure can make internal sensations harder to identify and explain. Preparing written observations about timing, location, functional impact and changes from baseline may provide more useful information than relying only on spontaneous speech.

🤐 Should I disclose autism or ADHD to every healthcare professional?

Disclosure is a personal decision. It may help explain communication and accommodation needs, but some people reasonably worry about stereotyping or diagnostic overshadowing. You can sometimes describe the support you need without disclosing a diagnosis.

🌧️ What should I do when a professional attributes everything to anxiety?

Ask which alternative explanations have been considered, what evidence supports the anxiety explanation and what changes would lead to further investigation. Anxiety can affect physical symptoms, but it should not automatically end an appropriate medical assessment.

🤝 How can a support person help without taking over?

A support person can help organise information, remember instructions, notice communication problems and assist with follow up. The patient should decide how the person participates, and professionals should continue to address the patient directly.

🧭 Where to Go Next

💬 When a Professional Does Not Understand Neurodivergence

Read Talking to Professionals Who Do Not Understand Neurodivergence for scripts, warning signs and decisions about whether to continue with a provider.

Continue with Neuroaffirming Care Explained to examine the principles of care that respects neurodivergent communication, identity and support needs.

🏥 When You Are Preparing for Medical Care

Use Going to the Doctor When You’re Autistic for practical preparation, symptom communication and appointment tools.

Read Hospital Visits for Neurodivergent Adults when the setting involves emergency care, admission, procedures or discharge planning.

🎧 When the Environment Causes Overload

Explore Neurodivergent Brains in Healthcare Waiting Rooms for strategies around noise, observation and uncertain waiting.

Continue with Understanding Neurodivergent Overwhelm to recognise how sensory, cognitive and communication demands combine.

🪞 When Medical Experiences Have Created Shame

Read Internalised Ableism in Neurodivergent Adults when repeated dismissal has made you doubt your needs or feel ashamed of asking for support.

Explore Neurodivergent Shame in ADHD and Autism when healthcare experiences have become part of a broader negative self story.

🧭 When You Need a Broader Learning Route

Visit the Neurodiversity Learning Hub for articles about access, identity, sensory processing, communication, work and daily functioning.

📚 References

📚 Calleja, S., Islam, F. M. A., Kingsley, J., and McDonald, R. (2020). Healthcare access for autistic adults: A systematic review. Medicine, 99(29), Article e20899.

📚 Doherty, M., Neilson, S., O’Sullivan, J., Carravallah, L., Johnson, M., Cullen, W., and Shaw, S. C. K. (2022). Barriers to healthcare and self-reported adverse outcomes for autistic adults: A cross-sectional study. BMJ Open, 12(2), Article e056904.

📚 Krishnamoorthy, T., Das, S., and Thomas, N. (2026). Stigma in adults with ADHD: A systematic review of types, experiences, and potential implications for quality of life. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 17, Article 1783271.

📚 Mason, D., Ingham, B., Urbanowicz, A., Michael, C., Birtles, H., Woodbury-Smith, M., Brown, T., James, I., Scarlett, C., Nicolaidis, C., and Parr, J. R. (2019). A Systematic Review of What Barriers and Facilitators Prevent and Enable Physical Healthcare Services Access for Autistic Adults. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 49(8), 3387–3400.

📚 Mazurek, M. O., Sadikova, E., Cheak-Zamora, N., Hardin, A., Sohl, K., and Malow, B. A. (2023). Health Care Needs, Experiences, and Perspectives of Autistic Adults. Autism in Adulthood, 5(1), 51–62.

📚 Nicolaidis, C., Raymaker, D., McDonald, K., Dern, S., Boisclair, W. C., Ashkenazy, E., and Baggs, A. (2013). Comparison of healthcare experiences in autistic and non-autistic adults: A cross-sectional online survey facilitated by an academic-community partnership. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 28(6), 761–769.

📚 Nicolaidis, C., Raymaker, D. M., McDonald, K. E., Kapp, S. K., Weiner, M., Ashkenazy, E., Gerrity, M., Kripke, C., Platt, L., and Baggs, A. (2016). The Development and Evaluation of an Online Healthcare Toolkit for Autistic Adults and their Primary Care Providers. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 31(10), 1180–1189.

📚 Shaw, S. C. K., Carravallah, L., Johnson, M., O’Sullivan, J., Chown, N., Neilson, S., and Doherty, M. (2024). Barriers to healthcare and a ‘triple empathy problem’ may lead to adverse outcomes for autistic adults: A qualitative study. Autism, 28(7), 1746–1757.

📚 Stein Duker, L. I., Giffin, W., Taylor, E. E., Shkhyan, L., Pomponio Davidson, A., and Mosqueda, L. (2025). Barriers and facilitators to primary healthcare encounters as reported by autistic adults: A qualitative study. Frontiers in Medicine, 12, Article 1481953.

📚 Strömberg, M., Liman, L., Bang, P., and Igelström, K. (2022). Experiences of Sensory Overload and Communication Barriers by Autistic Adults in Health Care Settings. Autism in Adulthood, 4(1), 66–75.