Adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) continue to face substantial barriers to obtaining and sustaining employment, including challenges related to social communication, understanding workplace expectations, and navigating job interviews, which contribute to underemployment and reduced quality of life. This scoping review mapped the contemporary evidence (2015-2025) on vocational training and employment-related interventions for autistic adults, with particular attention to intervention types, strengths/limitations, professional roles, and contextual factors shaping implementation. Following the Arksey and O'Malley framework and PRISMA reporting guidance, we searched PubMed, MEDLINE and Web of Science in two stages (June 2024; updated November 2025), combining ASD terms with vocational rehabilitation/employment and training terms. Records were deduplicated and screened in Rayyan using predefined eligibility criteria (adults ≥ 18 years with ASD; English-language empirical studies of vocational training interventions). The search identified 1117 records; after removing 434 duplicates, 683 records underwent title/abstract screening, 191 full texts were assessed, and 26 studies were included. Most studies were published from 2019 to 2025 (73.1%) and conducted in the United States (53.8%), followed by Japan (15.4%) and Australia (11.5%). Primary investigators most often represented psychology/psychiatry/clinical sciences (38.5%). Interventions were commonly delivered in workplace/community settings (57.7%), with highly variable dose: Among studies reporting calendar duration, the median was 23.0 weeks (range: 0.71-312), and among those reporting contact hours, the median was 32.0 h (range: 2-900). Qualitative synthesis identified three recurring themes: (1) integrated supported employment and work-based learning pathways (e.g., internship-to-employment models, customized employment, and IPS-informed approaches), (2) targeted work-readiness and discrete skill acquisition interventions (notably job interview and workplace social communication training, including technology-mediated formats), and (3) implementation context, stakeholder perspectives, and sustainability considerations. Overall, the evidence base is expanding but remains heterogeneous in intervention reporting and outcome measurement, underscoring the need for clearer specification of intervention components, professional roles, and occupationally meaningful outcomes.
Herlitasari et al. (Thu,) studied this question.