Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Little is known regarding the psychosocial outcomes of adult siblings of adults with autism. Accordingly, the current study sought to: (1) illuminate factors that predict health-related quality of life, caregiver burden, and reported benefits in adult siblings of adults with autism, using a stress and coping framework and (2) compare outcomes of siblings of adults with autism (n = 31) to siblings of adults with Down syndrome (DS) (n = 54). For the within subject hypotheses, analyses were repeated within the DS group and an overall Disability group (n = 97). The Disability group consisted of participants in the Autism and Down syndrome groups plus twelve individuals in a mixed group of adult siblings of adults with DS who presented with co-morbid symptoms of autism. Variables were organized using The Adult Sibling Caregiver Conceptual Model (ASCCM) into three categories: antecedents (e.g., sibling relationship quality, problem behaviors of the disabled sibling), mediators (e.g., coping strategies, cognitive appraisal types), and psychosocial outcome variables (i.e., mental and physical health-related quality of life, caregiver burden, and reported benefits). For the within subject primary hypotheses, I posited a series of relationships between the antecedents and outcomes based on prior literature on demographic and individual difference predictors (e.g., siblings of adults with autism with fewer problem behaviors would have increased health-related quality of life [HRQOL], decreased caregiver burden, and increased reported benefits) and on stress and coping factors related to the burden of providing care for an individual with autism (e.g., greater use of avoidant coping strategies would be related to lower HRQOL, increased caregiver burden, and decreased reports of benefits). Exploratory hypotheses also were examined (e.g., being married would be associated with increased HRQOL, decreased burden, and increased reported benefits). The within-subject results indicated support for eight of the ten primary hypotheses and five of the six exploratory hypotheses when examined within at least one of the study groups: Autism, DS, or Disability. Overall, sibling caregivers, regardless of their sibling’s disability, reported more favorable psychosocial outcomes when demands were lower (e.g., less severe levels of problem behaviors, fewer autism symptoms exhibited by their disabled sibling, decreased additional pile-up stress), when resources were available to cope with stress (e.g., social support, respite care), and when healthy responses to stress were reported (e.g., use of emotion focused vs. avoidant coping strategies, use of challenge vs. threat appraisal types). Of note, reported benefits, which have rarely been examined in the autism literature, were strongly related to the quality of a sibling relationship across all study groups, and with the helpfulness of received services and perceived social support within the Autism group. The between subject hypotheses also were largely supported. As expected, compared to siblings of those with Down syndrome, siblings of those with autism demonstrated greater levels of caregiver burden and lower mental HRQOL. Moreover, there was a rank ordering in levels of caregiver burden across disability groups; siblings of adults with DS reported the lowest burden, siblings of adults with DS with symptoms of autism reported significantly higher levels of burden, and siblings of those with autism reported the most burden. The results imply that autism, either alone or co-morbid with another diagnosis, presents an increased risk of stress and caregiver burden, not only in parent caregivers, but also in sibling caregivers. Interestingly, there was also evidence for higher levels of stress related growth within the Autism group compared to the DS group. Future research will be needed to generalize the results of this study to broader samples of adult siblings while taking a life course perspective to assess changes in non-disabled siblings’ outcomes over time.

La méthodologie de l’évaluation en psychothérapie s’est longtemps limitée aux résultats issus d’essais cliniques comparatifs de groupes. L’objectif, engagé dans les années 2000, de comprendre ce qui cause son efficacité a engagé un renouvellement méthodologique. Son application concrète est peu documentée. La première partie présente, à partir d’une revue de la littérature centrée sur l’introduction de la recherche sur le processus associée aux résultats, comment le paradigme interactionnel multifactoriel de la psychothérapie a stimulé le développement de méthodes adaptées à la complexité et à l’observation en conditions naturelles. La seconde partie introduit autour de cinq axes principaux les questions méthodologiques générales et spécifiques de cette nouvelle orientation : 1. une épistémologie interactionnelle et transactionnelle ; 2. Un recentrage sur les études mixtes intensives de cas ; 3. Une investigation clinique et théorique multifocale des processus et mécanismes de changement ; 4. une forte relation clinicien-chercheur ; 5. une approche statistique innovante. La troisième partie expose l’expérience et les questions soulevées par la mise en œuvre de ce programme dans le cadre d’un réseau de recherche clinique centré sur les pratiques, du recueil des données jusqu’à l’analyse des processus et mécanismes de changement, et les résultats qui en sont issus. La quatrième partie présente une revue détaillée de la littérature. Ce travail devrait favoriser les collaborations avec les disciplines connexes et l’efficience des traitements par une meilleure connaissance des conditions et des mécanismes de changement associée au développement d’une base de données issue d’études de cas. / The methodology of assessment in psychotherapy has long been limited to results from comparative group clinical trials. The objective, expressed in the 2000s, to understand what is causing its effectiveness has involved a methodological renewal. Its concrete application is poorly documented. The first part presents, from a review of the literature focusing on the introduction of research on the process associated with outcomes, how the multifactorial interactional paradigm of psychotherapy has stimulated the development of methods adapted to the complexity and observation in natural conditions. The second part introduces the general and specific methodological questions of this new orientation around five main axes: 1. an interactional and transactional epistemology; 2. A refocusing on intensive mixed case studies; 3. A multifocal clinical and theoretical investigation of the processes and mechanisms of change; 4. a strong clinical-researcher relationship; 5. an innovative statistical approach. The third part presents the experience and issues raised by the implementation of this program as part of a practice-oriented clinical research network, from data collection to analysis of processes and mechanisms of change, and results. The fourth part presents a detailed review of the literature. This work should foster collaborations with related disciplines and treatment efficiency through a better understanding of the conditions and mechanisms of change associated with the development of a case study database.