ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2026
Family Navigation for Children with Autism: A Scoping Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Evidence.
Article in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Family navigation (FN) has emerged as a promising intervention for reducing barriers and addressing social and economic inequities in autism service delivery. Little is known regarding the implementation and effectiveness of FN for children with autism. The aims of this scoping review are to: (1) summarize the breadth, quantity, and characteristics of the existing literature on FN for children diagnosed with autism; (2) describe the models and outcomes of FN for this population; and (3) identify knowledge gaps and provide directions for future research. Authors used Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework for scoping reviews. Searches were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Social Services Abstracts, and Web of Science, resulting in identification of 308 papers. Two independent raters completed title/abstract and full-text screenings. Data was extracted using a researcher-developed tool. Results synthesis involved content and construct analysis and descriptive numerical summaries. 17 publications met inclusion criteria. Among these, seven studies evaluated FN models delivered by professional or peer navigators. Three studies investigated FN tools. The remaining seven papers included five qualitative and two mixed methods studies that provided valuable insights on improving FN programs. Overall, studies on FN models reported positive impacts on family activation and well-being, knowledge, and service access and utilization. None addressed improvements in child developmental status or behavioral profiles. FN is a promising intervention for improving family outcomes and increasing service access and utilization. Further research is needed to establish best practices, identify child- and family-centered outcome metrics, and promote scalability and sustainability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40100561What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.