The Director of Research then identifies a relevant subject expert for each intervention. (That subject expert may or may not be one of our scientific advisors.)
The subject expert advises the Information Manager on the key points and key references to include for that intervention.
The Information Manager undertakes a literature review to identify any other relevant references. The review includes searching a range of key sources , such as Autism Data and Pub Med.
The Information Manager looks at the summaries of the materials, discards any which do no meet the agreed criteria, and then obtains full copies of all of the remaining references.
Each reference is then analysed against a standard checklist to determine the scientific validity of the research. This checklist is an amended version of the checklists developed by the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence for similar purposes.
The key findings are then put into an evidence table – which allows us to compare information from a range of studies.
The Information Manager then pulls all of this information together, using an agreed template, and adds additional information about the intervention for people who know nothing about the subject.
The template and all other materials are then sent to the Director of Research for comments and criticism.
The amended version is then sent to the subject expert who checks it for accuracy and scientific validity.
The amended version is then sent to a pilot group of users which includes people with autism and carers. They check the information for accuracy, relevance and accessibility,
The final version is then sent to the Science & Advisory Committee for sign off, after which the information is published on our website.
The information is then reviewed on a regular basis i.e. at least once every two years.