A doctor’s appointment, shopping in the supermarket or a conversation at a government office: what sounds like routine to many people can involve considerable strain for people with autism. A research team in Austria, working together with those affected and professionals, has examined which barriers weigh most heavily and how everyday life can be made more accessible. The study, published on 16 October 2026, does not only point out problems. It also describes concrete projects that grew out of the collaboration.
Not just researching people with autism, but with them
The research team led by Lukas Wohofsky at the Carinthia University of Applied Sciences (Fachhochschule Kärnten) took a participatory approach. People with autism, relatives and professionals were not only to give information about difficulties, but to decide for themselves which solutions they wanted to develop.
The starting point was a survey of 55 people. They included 15 people with autism, eight relatives or other people close to them who provide informal support, and 18 professional supporters. A further 14 people gave no information about their connection to the topic. The answers therefore reflect different perspectives. They are not a representative survey of people with autism.
Six working groups followed, on education, healthcare, contact with authorities, shopping, working life, and information and exchange. In total, 40 people took part at some point; at the end of the project, 28 were still involved, including eight people with autism. The groups largely set their own goals and work steps.
Where the strain in everyday life was greatest
In the survey, different areas of life were rated on a scale from 1 (pleasant) to 10 (very stressful). Social contacts reached an average of 7.9 points, the use of public transport 7.7 and education 7.5. Contact with authorities and healthcare were each at 7.4 points.
Behind these figures were different experiences. Named were crowded rooms, noise, unexpected changes and unclear procedures. In contact with authorities, for example, long waiting times and difficulties finding one’s way caused strain. For doctor’s visits, participants reported, among other things, communication barriers and a lack of knowledge about autism among professionals.
The values describe the assessments of this small, mixed group of respondents. They do not say that every person with autism experiences the same situations as equally difficult. But they make clear where the participants saw a need for change.
From teaching materials to support with shopping
The working groups developed practical offers instead of leaving it at general recommendations. For schools and institutions, information and sensory materials were created. According to the researchers, 396 material boxes were put together and distributed in Carinthia. In addition, an education group drew up a guide with advice on designing lessons, supporting pupils with autism and possible adjustments in exams.
Another group compiled a regional guide to health services that are meant to respond to the needs of people with autism. It was based, among other things, on the experiences of those affected and other participants with medical professionals. The guide is a local project result, not scientific proof of the effectiveness of the services listed.
Information brochures were produced for authorities and other public bodies; more than 500 copies were printed and distributed. The working group on working life developed materials for employers and for people with autism looking for work.
Shopping support by other people with autism was also tried out. During the two-month pilot phase, however, the offer was used very little. The concept was then passed on to a local organisation for further development. This example in particular shows that a well-founded idea is not automatically taken up in everyday life.
What schools, practices and authorities can take from this
The study took place in Carinthia. Its results do not establish any new obligations for institutions in Germany. But they offer suggestions on how professionals and those responsible can identify barriers together with people with autism.
In schools, this could mean announcing procedures early and clearly, discussing places to retreat and shaping lessons or exam situations individually. In doctors’ practices, practical starting points would be, for example, information about the procedure before the appointment, as clear communication as possible and the option of stating particular sensory needs. Authorities could check whether waiting times, signage and written communication create unnecessary hurdles.
These are possible actions derived from the difficulties reported, not measures tested for effectiveness in the study. What matters is to ask the person concerned what they actually need. Not all people with autism want the same adjustments.
What the study can deliver – and what it cannot
The work documents a regional participatory project, not a controlled study of whether particular measures measurably improve everyday life. There was neither a representative sample nor a comparison group. Long-term changes in quality of life were not demonstrated either.
There are also limits to the participation itself. The working groups mostly met in person, which could exclude people with limited time or mobility. In some groups, no people with autism took part. The authors therefore explicitly point out that further projects should offer more flexible digital or time-shifted forms of participation.
The feedback from participants was predominantly positive. However, this shows above all how they perceived the course of the project – not that the materials developed will be equally useful in other regions.
Inclusion begins with letting those affected help decide
The study offers no simple solution to all barriers. Its news value lies precisely in the fact that people with autism, relatives and professionals jointly worked out concrete offers for everyday situations: from materials for schools to orientation in the healthcare system.
For practice, an obvious question follows: are people with autism merely asked about their difficulties – or can they also influence which changes are implemented? The experience from Carinthia argues for planning participation early and then critically reviewing its results.
Sources
Wohofsky, L. et al. (2026): Development of Autism-Inclusive Approaches for Everyday Life in a Participatory Process: From Challenges to Resolutions. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. Published on 16 October 2026.
Found a mistake?
If something is factually wrong, out of date or unclear, let us know. You do not have to give any personal details.
