How would you describe autism? - Language Research released

Thanks for the tip Longman.
I've just read through the whole SAGE document from beginning to end. 

The questions asked were good, the responses varied and enlightening. But the imbalance between the number of Aspie's/Autistics who took part, and the number comprising the rest of the groups, is a disgrace.

One answerer said that more weight should be attached to the views of people who have autism or Asperger Syndrome. The ASC's did not even have equal numbers to match that great raft of professional opinions, let alone being given precedence. 
Strangely, the 'Abstract' lists members of the autism community in this order... 'autistic people' first, followed by parents, then lastly the 'broader support network' (presumably including all the professionals). The survey numbers did not reflect the blurb.

The NAS's reported preference of professionals for the term ASD was slightly different in the tables - as ASD came equal with several other terms. I was relieved to read that many professionals feel uncomfortable with the use of Disorder... hurrah! Perhaps such a negative term will be phased out. 

There was much support for 'Asperger's' and 'Aspie'. I can only imagine how much more support Aspie/Asperger's would have gained had the numbers in the different participation groups not been skewed.

With smaller numbers you get results and opinions that seem disjointed and disconnected.  With larger numbers you learn much more and a bigger picture emerges. With each of the groups participating being equal you get a fair result. As the group numbers were so unequal, surely those bar charts are not completely valid.

I find it worrying that the conclusion seems to regard the survey results as a kind of signpost... for the professionals maybe, but not for the huge community of people who actually have Asperger's and Autism. 

Here was chance to learn what large numbers of AS/ASC's want for themselves and from other people. 
I cannot help thinking that a huge opportunity has been missed. 

Thanks for the tip Longman.
I've just read through the whole SAGE document from beginning to end. 

The questions asked were good, the responses varied and enlightening. But the imbalance between the number of Aspie's/Autistics who took part, and the number comprising the rest of the groups, is a disgrace.

One answerer said that more weight should be attached to the views of people who have autism or Asperger Syndrome. The ASC's did not even have equal numbers to match that great raft of professional opinions, let alone being given precedence. 
Strangely, the 'Abstract' lists members of the autism community in this order... 'autistic people' first, followed by parents, then lastly the 'broader support network' (presumably including all the professionals). The survey numbers did not reflect the blurb.

The NAS's reported preference of professionals for the term ASD was slightly different in the tables - as ASD came equal with several other terms. I was relieved to read that many professionals feel uncomfortable with the use of Disorder... hurrah! Perhaps such a negative term will be phased out. 

There was much support for 'Asperger's' and 'Aspie'. I can only imagine how much more support Aspie/Asperger's would have gained had the numbers in the different participation groups not been skewed.

With smaller numbers you get results and opinions that seem disjointed and disconnected.  With larger numbers you learn much more and a bigger picture emerges. With each of the groups participating being equal you get a fair result. As the group numbers were so unequal, surely those bar charts are not completely valid.

I find it worrying that the conclusion seems to regard the survey results as a kind of signpost... for the professionals maybe, but not for the huge community of people who actually have Asperger's and Autism. 

Here was chance to learn what large numbers of AS/ASC's want for themselves and from other people. 
I cannot help thinking that a huge opportunity has been missed.