View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Supporting Inclusion in Informal Education Settings for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Scoping Review

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Supporting Inclusion in Informal Education Settings for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Scoping Review
Language: English
Authors: Julia M. Ranieri, Nicole Neil (ORCID 0000-0001-5906-3880), Monica Sadowski, Mohammad Azzam
Source: Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities. 2024 36(6):955-993.
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 39
Publication Date: 2024
Document Type: Journal Articles
Information Analyses
Descriptors: Inclusion, Students with Disabilities, Informal Education, Content Analysis, Student Participation, Neurodevelopmental Disorders, Outcome Based Education, Accessibility (for Disabled), Camps, Interpersonal Competence, Positive Behavior Supports, Caregivers, Student Attitudes, Special Programs, Caregiver Attitudes, Positive Attitudes
DOI: 10.1007/s10882-024-09970-8
ISSN: 1056-263X
1573-3580
Abstract: Children with neurodevelopmental disabilities are among the most vulnerable to experiencing exclusion from community settings. Informal education settings (IES), such as camps, museums, and zoos, provide rich learning opportunities beyond the classroom, yet inclusion efforts have primarily focused on physical accessibility. A review of research is needed to identify practices that support the participation of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities in these settings. We used a scoping review framework to determine what research exists concerning the participation of individuals with neurodevelopmental disabilities in informal education settings, what practices are used to foster participation in informal education settings for children with neurodevelopmental disabilities and what are the outcomes of these practices on participation. Forty-six studies using quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods designs were included, with 24 taking place in inclusive settings or programs. The review found that children with neurodevelopmental disabilities continue to experience barriers to inclusion in informal settings, and there are positive outcomes associated with specialized and therapeutic as well as inclusive camps. Moreover, behavioural supports result in increases in social skills and decreases in interfering behaviour in informal settings and caregivers and children with neurodevelopmental disabilities have positive attitudes toward specialized programming. Encouraging and sustaining a variety of options, including inclusive and specialized programs, is likely to support and enhance inclusion. Future studies on inclusive practices in IES should include measures of the degree and quality of participation, including measures of the subjective experiences of participants.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: EJ1448025
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHXCrp27wP5LX5F_0wsdW5gAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDDyhfvfiFhorYlIZvgIBEICBm0Vd0dgualM6x3GXZpC4_HCPcunrj5ZaUNSaBs0Dpch3xhA6dwdPNH5AXW79hikGLXEHR8-xcgnf5m6CWP-S26pgr-QYHG_vW4k-0hwA3LBI28KdG3OSY4VlE0PXlZfvayfbhMYx3GWWl-oquXvZsy22GqtypZS6oRFXRW5UQli2lIA7FwnzTJkG5DbuNO79NPuimTnURum6s2Zk
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0180830221;jdp01dec.24;2024Nov14.05:12;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0180830221-1">Supporting Inclusion in Informal Education Settings for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Scoping Review </title> <p>Children with neurodevelopmental disabilities are among the most vulnerable to experiencing exclusion from community settings. Informal education settings (IES), such as camps, museums, and zoos, provide rich learning opportunities beyond the classroom, yet inclusion efforts have primarily focused on physical accessibility. A review of research is needed to identify practices that support the participation of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities in these settings. We used a scoping review framework to determine what research exists concerning the participation of individuals with neurodevelopmental disabilities in informal education settings, what practices are used to foster participation in informal education settings for children with neurodevelopmental disabilities and what are the outcomes of these practices on participation. Forty-six studies using quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods designs were included, with 24 taking place in inclusive settings or programs. The review found that children with neurodevelopmental disabilities continue to experience barriers to inclusion in informal settings, and there are positive outcomes associated with specialized and therapeutic as well as inclusive camps. Moreover, behavioural supports result in increases in social skills and decreases in interfering behaviour in informal settings and caregivers and children with neurodevelopmental disabilities have positive attitudes toward specialized programming. Encouraging and sustaining a variety of options, including inclusive and specialized programs, is likely to support and enhance inclusion. Future studies on inclusive practices in IES should include measures of the degree and quality of participation, including measures of the subjective experiences of participants.</p> <p>Keywords: Informal education settings; Neurodevelopmental disabilities; Inclusion; Participation</p> <p>Copyright comment Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</p> <p>Neurodevelopmental disorders are a group of conditions characterized by difficulties with personal, social, academic, and occupational functioning appearing within the developmental period (American Psychiatric Association, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref1">7</reflink>]). Examples of diagnoses under the neurodevelopmental disabilities category include autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), intellectual disability, and specific learning disabilities. Prevalence rates of neurodevelopmental range from as low as 0.63% for intellectual disability and as high as 17% for motor disorders (Francés et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref2">45</reflink>]).</p> <p>There has been much work in characterizing the participation of people with neurodevelopmental disabilities in community settings (Amado et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref3">5</reflink>]; Cameron et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref4">15</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref5">16</reflink>]; Taheri et al., [<reflink idref="bib96" id="ref6">96</reflink>]; Tint et al., [<reflink idref="bib99" id="ref7">99</reflink>]), but none of these focus on informal education settings (IES). IES are environments where learning takes place outside of formal education classrooms (Spencer & Maynard, [<reflink idref="bib94" id="ref8">94</reflink>]). While there is no single agreed-upon definition of informal learning, researchers generally agree that informal learning is non-didactic, embedded in meaningful activity, builds on the learners' interests or choices, and does not involve assessment external to the activity (Rogoff et al., [<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref9">83</reflink>]). Informal learning can include the learning that occurs through everyday family and community interactions. For this scoping review, we focus on structured informal contexts or informal education institutions (e.g., museums, science centres, aquariums, libraries and camps; Rogoff et al., [<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref10">83</reflink>]) that have an instructional as well as voluntary leisure focus, recognizing that informal education includes much more than these. These settings are often designed spaces, with organized learning activities supporting learning and personal growth (Rogoff et al., [<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref11">83</reflink>]) and represent the majority of the research in IES (Vadeboncoeur, [<reflink idref="bib102" id="ref12">102</reflink>]).</p> <p>IES such as museums, camps, and science centres are important aspects of the community; more than 15,000 camps are held each year, serving >26 million children and adults making them part of the cultural landscape (Clark & Nwokah, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref13">21</reflink>]; The American Camp Association [ACA], [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref14">6</reflink>]). Research also shows that experiences within informal education settings can play a crucial role in the development of children's desire for learning, curiosity, and interest in various academic fields (Dierking et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref15">34</reflink>]; Eberbach & Crowley, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref16">39</reflink>]; Marcus et al., [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref17">68</reflink>]; Sobel & Jipson, [<reflink idref="bib92" id="ref18">92</reflink>]). They provide space for free-choice and experiential learning, play and social interaction, shared experiences within families, for developing a sense of community and belonging, and may be a context for supporting the inclusion of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities (Langa et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref19">62</reflink>]; Ryuh et al., [<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref20">84</reflink>]). Despite their importance, these contexts remain under-researched in terms of the participation and inclusion of people with neurodevelopmental disabilities.</p> <p>IES have a duty to be inclusive according to various legislative requirements and standards. At the global level, participation is every child's right (UN General Assembly, [<reflink idref="bib101" id="ref21">101</reflink>]), and various provincial and national legislature protects individuals with disabilities against exclusion (Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref22">1</reflink>]; Accessible Canada Act, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref23">2</reflink>], Americans with Disabilities Act, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref24">8</reflink>]). Participation is typically defined based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and is a person's "involvement in a life situation" (World Health Organization [WHO], [<reflink idref="bib106" id="ref25">106</reflink>]). It is about much more than being physically present: it includes the capacity to participate, the performance, and interactions with others. Social inclusion is access to socially valued activities such as employment and education, having a social network, and having meaningful relationships (Amado et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref26">5</reflink>]). While we draw on the well-known definitions of participation and social inclusion set out by the ICF (WHO, [<reflink idref="bib106" id="ref27">106</reflink>]), our understanding is also informed by the works of Cummins and Lau ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref28">25</reflink>]), Cushing ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref29">26</reflink>]), and Simplican et al. ([<reflink idref="bib89" id="ref30">89</reflink>]). Social inclusion is described by Simplican et al. ([<reflink idref="bib89" id="ref31">89</reflink>]) as an interaction between two domains: interpersonal relationships, and community participation. These scholars also note the limits of defining community as exclusively those without disabilities as people with neurodevelopmental disabilities report value in their relationships with others with disabilities (McVilly et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref32">69</reflink>]). Participation and inclusion in community settings measures primarily address: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref33">1</reflink>) the degree of participation and inclusion; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref34">2</reflink>) relationships and belonging; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref35">3</reflink>) factors that affect social inclusion; and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref36">4</reflink>) strategies to address social inclusion (Amado et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref37">5</reflink>]). Such objective measures must be also accompanied by measures of the subjective feelings of belonging to understand social inclusion (Fulton et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref38">46</reflink>]). Without capturing subjective experiences, practices for improving social inclusion are likely to only improve social exposure or physical presence in community settings (Cobigo et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref39">23</reflink>]).</p> <p>Participation and inclusion in IES result in many positive effects on both physical and mental well-being for those with and without disabilities including increases in positive self-concept, increased adaptive behaviour, greater friendship formation, and increased quality of life (Merrells et al., [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref40">70</reflink>]; Shields et al., [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref41">88</reflink>]). Participation in IES provides opportunities for physical activity, active play, and the development of curiosity and confidence (Taylor & Kervin, [<reflink idref="bib97" id="ref42">97</reflink>]). For example, children with autism who attended an art museum were more likely to bond with peers, feel comfortable in large groups, and display increased social communication skills (Deng, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref43">30</reflink>]). Recognizing the need to provide inclusive experiences, some IES also offer adaptations to meet the needs of individuals with neurodevelopmental disabilities, such as sensory-friendly events (Lussenhop et al., [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref44">66</reflink>]; Mulligan et al., [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref45">74</reflink>]). Families report enjoying these events but sometimes feel their options are limited to such specialized programs (Kulik & Fletcher, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref46">60</reflink>]).</p> <p>Despite the benefits, the participation needs of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities are not always attended to, resulting in barriers to participation. Efforts towards inclusion in IES have primarily focused on physical accessibility rather than social or cognitive inclusion (Deng, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref47">29</reflink>]; Lussenhop et al., [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref48">66</reflink>]; Poria et al., [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref49">78</reflink>]; Reich et al., [<reflink idref="bib82" id="ref50">82</reflink>]). This emphasis on physical accessibility results in individuals with neurodevelopmental disabilities continuing to experience exclusion from informal education opportunities (Deng, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref51">29</reflink>]; Lussenhop et al., [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref52">66</reflink>]; Poria et al., [<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref53">78</reflink>]).</p> <p>As a result of barriers to inclusion in IES, children with neurodevelopmental disabilities miss out on learning opportunities and report reduced feelings of belonging in their communities (Amado et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref54">5</reflink>]; Lussenhop et al., [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref55">66</reflink>]; Solish et al., [<reflink idref="bib93" id="ref56">93</reflink>]). For example, parents of children with neurodevelopmental disorders report staff request the removal of their children from IES because of their disruptive behaviour or behaviour that differs from neurotypical children (Langa et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref57">62</reflink>]). In other IES contexts, such as camps, children with neurodevelopmental disabilities have been excluded or limited to therapeutic or specialized settings (i.e., segregated programs designed for campers with disabilities; Blake, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref58">13</reflink>]) while participation in inclusive camp programming continues to result in rejection from nondisabled peers (Devine, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref59">32</reflink>]). Given the barriers children with neurodevelopmental disorders face in IES, continued research is needed to understand practices supporting inclusion and participation in these settings.</p> <p>Several reviews have investigated community participation for adults with autism (Cameron et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref60">15</reflink>]; Giummarra et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref61">47</reflink>]; Tobin et al., [<reflink idref="bib100" id="ref62">100</reflink>]), and children with intellectual disabilities (Amado et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref63">5</reflink>]; Andrews et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref64">9</reflink>]; Verdonschot et al., [<reflink idref="bib103" id="ref65">103</reflink>]). Others focus on specific community settings or practices, such as arts programs (Edwards et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref66">40</reflink>]), sports (Zhao et al., [<reflink idref="bib108" id="ref67">108</reflink>]), or recreation therapy (Santiago Perez & Crowe, [<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref68">85</reflink>]). There is, as yet, little work on the current state of participation and inclusion in IES and through what training or practices inclusion and participation are being promoted in these settings. Thus, our objectives in this research are to examine the current state of participation and inclusion of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities in IES with the following research questions:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> What research exists concerning the participation and inclusion of individuals with neurodevelopmental disabilities in informal education settings?</item> <p></p> <item> What practices are used to foster participation and inclusion in informal education settings for children with neurodevelopmental disabilities?</item> <p></p> <item> What are the outcomes of these practices on participation and inclusion?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0180830221-2">Methods</hd> <p>The methods were guided by Arksey and O'Malley ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref69">10</reflink>]) a framework including identification of the research question; identification of relevant studies; study selection; data charting; and collating, summarizing, and reporting results. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMAScR) table can be found in Appendix.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-3">Search Strategy and Study Selection</hd> <p>Searches were conducted in January 2024 for research published after January 2005 in the following databases: ERIC, Web of Science, and PsycINFO. We limited the search to more recent research (occurring after 2005) given the progressive changes in the field of inclusion and neurodevelopmental disabilities. Keywords for neurodevelopmental disabilities were paired with keywords for IES with the Boolean operator <emph>AND</emph> (see Table 1). Reference lists of included studies were hand-searched and identified studies were directly added to full-text screening.</p> <p>Table 1 Search terms</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"><p>Concept</p></th><th align="left"><p>Terms</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>Diagnosis of disability</p></td><td align="left"><p>"intellectual disability*" OR "mental retardation" OR "learning disab*" OR "Down* syndrome" OR "fetal alcohol*" OR "fragile X syndrome" OR "Prader?Willi syndrome" OR "developmental disabilit*" OR "developmental disorder*" OR "developmental delay*" OR "neurodevelopmental disorder*" OR "neurodevelopmental disabilit*" OR "pervasive developmental disorder*" OR "pervasive developmental delay*" OR "pervasive developmental disab" OR Asperger* OR Rhett* OR autism* OR ASD OR "attention deficit disorder*" OR ADHD OR "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder*" OR "Motor disorder" OR "stereotyp* movement disorder*" or "stammering" or "cluttering" OR "tic disorder*" OR Tourette* OR "communication disorder" OR "language* disorder*" OR "Speech sound disorder*" OR "Childhood?Onset Fluency Disorder*" or Stuttering or "specific learning disorder*"</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Informal education settings</p></td><td align="left"><p>museum* OR "informal* learning" OR Aquarium OR Camp OR Zoo OR Galler* OR "informal* education" OR "librar*"</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>All search results were exported to Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia. Available at <ulink href="http://www.covidence.org">www.covidence.org</ulink>) where duplicates were removed. Initially, two authors independently screened all titles and abstracts, resulting in 93.06% agreement. The full texts were independently reviewed for inclusion by the same two authors, resulting in 89.33% agreement. A third reviewer was used when conflicts were noted and disagreements were discussed until consensus (Fig. 1).</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 PRISMA-ScR flow diagram</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-4">Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria</hd> <p>For this scoping review, we focus on six structured informal contexts including museums, science centers, zoos, camps, libraries and galleries. While they do not represent all IES, they represent a large proportion of the settings in research on IES (Vadeboncoeur, [<reflink idref="bib102" id="ref70">102</reflink>]). Articles included in this review met the following criteria: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref71">1</reflink>) presented empirical data; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref72">2</reflink>) included participants ≤ 21 years old with a neurodevelopmental disorder (or be a respondent on behalf of an individual with an neurodevelopmental disorder) in their sample; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref73">3</reflink>) took place in an IES (museum, science centre, zoo, camp, library, or gallery); and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref74">4</reflink>) reported outcomes about inclusion and participation, social functioning, or social participation.</p> <p>Studies were excluded if they (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref75">1</reflink>) were not written in English; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref76">2</reflink>) focused exclusively on physical practices or outcomes, adaptive behaviour outcomes, or educational outcomes; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref77">3</reflink>) took place in formal educational settings and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref78">4</reflink>) were not peer-reviewed.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-5">Data Extraction</hd> <p>Two authors charted all data from articles that met inclusion criteria in Excel using a coding scheme developed for the study (See Table 2). To answer the first research question, two authors independently charted the citation, year, country, participant characteristics (sample size, age range, diagnosis), setting characteristics (type of IES and whether the setting was inclusive), study design, outcome measures, informants, and key findings. All disagreements were resolved through discussion. To answer the second research question, two authors extracted data recorded practices as present or not present, and what practice was described within the original study within the introduction or methods sections. Each practice was initially coded into broader categories. After the initial cycle of coding, they sorted each coded list into categories based on similarities resulting in 43 practices. Categories were informed by evidence-based practice reviews by the National Autism Centre and the National Professional Development Centre (Hume et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref79">53</reflink>]; National Autism Center, [<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref80">76</reflink>]). To answer the third research question, we summarized the main findings of each of the included articles into bullet points, followed by defining more general categories based on an abstraction of these findings.</p> <p>Table 2 Summary of included studies</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left" /><th align="left" colspan="2"><p><bold>Context</bold></p></th><th align="left" colspan="2"><p><bold>Participants</bold></p></th><th align="left" /><th align="left" /><th align="left" /><th align="left" /></tr><tr><th align="left"><p><bold>Study</bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold>IES</bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold>Inclusive?</bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold>N (NDD), Age range</bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold>Diagnoses</bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold>Research design</bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold>Measures</bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold>Respondent</bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold>Key findings</bold></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>Aggerholm & Moltke Martiny, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr3">2017</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>11(11)</p><p>14 to 18</p></td><td align="left"><p>CP</p></td><td align="left"><p>Qualitative,</p><p>Phenomenology</p></td><td align="left"><p>Semi-structured group interviews</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Themes included gaining bodily control in difficult situations, learning new ways to approach challenges, learning the importance of sharing and learning from one another, and self-understanding and acceptance.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Alper, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr4">2021</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Various informal settings</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>27(27)</p><p>3 to 13</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD, ASD, AS, childhood apraxia of speech, Dyslexia, epilepsy, ID, fragile X syndrome, mixed developmental disorder, mixed receptive-expressive language disorder, PDD-NOS, speech delay</p></td><td align="left"><p>Qualitative,</p><p>Grounded theory, phenomenological, constant comparative</p></td><td align="left"><p>Semi-structured interviews, direct observations</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Direct Observation, Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Attendance rates were higher in autism-friendly events in urban centres; autistic children actively self-regulated using sensory materials available, parents selected between different sensory-friendly spaces based on child preferences and space features; some people did not use the spaces for various reasons including inconvenient timing, inconsistent scheduling, and personal, social, and economic factors.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Blachman & Hinshaw, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr12">2002</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>228(140)</p><p>6 to 12</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Descriptive</p></td><td align="left"><p>WISC-III, Sociometric Nomination, Friendship Participation, Friendship Stability/Durability, Friendship Qualities Measure</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Girls with ADHD developed fewer friendships than comparison girls. Participants with ADHD with mutual friendships had lower quality friendships than peers.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Boyd et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr14">2008</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>12(6)</p><p>5 to 10</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD, Visual Impairment, Emotional Disorder</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-case design</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation: percentage of intervals in which an interaction between campers with and without disabilities occurred</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation</p></td><td align="left"><p>Interactions between campers with and without disabilities increased following the STAR program.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Cei et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr18">2019</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>29(29)</p><p>8 to 13</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>The Adaptive Social Skills Measure (ASSM)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Parents perceived significant improvement in all four subscales (Verbal Communication, Social Interaction, Transitions, and Attention to Task) from pre- to post-treatment in the summer sport camp.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Cei et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr19">2023</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>90(90)</p><p>7 to 18</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASSM</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Parents perceived significant improvement in communication, social interaction, transitions and attention to task from pre- to post-program.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Corbett et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr24">2014</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>12(12)</p><p>8 to 17</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD, PDD-NOS, AS</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Social Responsiveness Scale, Socia Communication Questionnaire, A Developmental Neuropsychological Assessment (NEPSY):</p><p>Affect Recognition, Memory for Faces; Parenting Stress Index (PSI); Adaptive Behavior Assessment System (ABAS); Companionship Scale; Cortisol Sampling; Direct observation of interactions</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Direct Observation</p></td><td align="left"><p>Increase in active involvement with peers from pre-to-post intervention with the SENSE summer camp. Increase in social functioning and adaptive skills from pre-post treatment. No differences in observations of playground interactions.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Després et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr31">2022</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left"><p>25(25)</p><p>8 to 17</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD, coordination acquisition disorder Down syndrome, dyscalculia, dyspraxia, ID, motor delay, sensory processing disorder,</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed methods, mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>ABAS-II, Interview, Observations, Discussion Group</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, self, staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>No significant changes in adaptive behaviour or communication. Observations showed generally positive changes in communication, social skills, autonomy, technology and musical skills.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>D'Eloia & Sibthorp, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr27">2014</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>209(109)</p><p>12 to 17</p></td><td align="left"><p>CP, DD, SB, Spinal cord injury, neurofibromatosis</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Quasi-experimental, two-group pre-test, post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mechanisms of Relatedness Scale (MOR), Youth Relatedness Scale</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Campers with and without disabilities perceived that camp was more supportive of the five MOR variables (challenging experiences, informal social interactions, meaningful roles, learning experiences, and peer role modelling) than their non-camp environments. Youth with disabilities, compared to youth without disabilities, experienced greater engagement with peer role models and more social opportunities at camp than in their non-camp environments.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Dawson et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr28">2018</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>76(76)</p><p>8 to 18</p></td><td align="left"><p>Muscular dystrophy, CP, SB, spinal muscular atrophy</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Social network analysis</p></td><td align="left"><p>Five-question important matters name generator</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Campers identify relatives as who go to for important matters with camp contacts reported second most frequently. True reciprocal relationships were reported by 42.86% of participants.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Deng, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr29">2015</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Museum</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>10(10)</p><p>8 to 15</p></td><td align="left"><p>HFASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>pre-gallery and post-gallery tour task evaluations, observations, Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS), parent surveys, and semi-structured parent interviews</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Self, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Participation in a tailored educational museum program positively influenced the knowledge of art, and social behaviours of children with ASD including making requests, and social behaviour as measured by the SRS.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Devine & Parr, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr33">2008</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>8(4)</p><p>2 to 16</p></td><td align="left"><p>Spinal Muscular Atrophy, AS, ADHD, CP, Global Developmental Delay</p></td><td align="left"><p>Qualitative,</p><p>Constant Comparison</p></td><td align="left"><p>Semi-structured interviews, field notes</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Three conceptual categories were constructed including reciprocity and investment, inclusions and camouflage and roles that mediate social capital. Campers had mixed perceptions related to reciprocity. Inclusion can act to mask and highlight differences between campers with and without disabilities. Counsellors acted as models and facilitators of relationships.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Dipeolu et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr35">2016</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>173(27)</p><p>8 to 15</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD, LD, multiple disabilities, physical disabilities</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Concept Mapping</p></td><td align="left"><p>Interviews, sorting, and rating</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>A seven-cluster concept map was generated with themes including Healthy Camp Fun, Extraordinary Experiences, Structured Opportunities, Personal and Social Transformations, A Safe and Supportive Place to Learn, Acceptance of Self and Others, and Respite and Reward.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Doody & Patti, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr36">2017</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Museum</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>224(Average of 25 children per month)</p><p>2 to 12</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>Exit surveys, online surveys</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Parents indicated that Au-some events were beneficial because they were predictable, offered the opportunity to interact in an inclusive setting, and were non-judgemental. They benefited families by supporting a sense of community and empowerment.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Dunst, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr37">2020</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Various informal settings</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>206(115)</p><p>3 to 6</p></td><td align="left"><p>Down syndrome, DD, developmentally at risk, medically at risk</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>Observations of the children in everyday activities, interviews of the parents or other primary caregivers, coding of artifactual evidence (photographs, physical objects, etc.)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Direct observation</p></td><td align="left"><p>Everyday social and non-social experiences of children with and without disabilities or delays were more similar than different, family activities provided children more learning opportunities than did community activities.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Eaton et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr38">2016</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>84(37)</p><p>7 to 18</p></td><td align="left"><p>Tourette Syndrome</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Perceived Competence Scale for Children (PCS), Children's Attitude Towards Illness Scale; Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children (MASC); Peer Comparison; Tourette's Disorder Scale-Parent Rated Version (TODSPR); Spence Child Anxiety Scale for Parents (SCAS-P)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Campers endorsed significantly higher mean levels of social self-competence and more favourable attitudes towards having TS after camp. Campers felt less different than their peers at camp. After attending camp, caregivers endorsed significantly lower mean levels of symptoms associated with TS.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Fan et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr41">2022</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>1(1)</p><p>9</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>POPE observation, interviews</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation, Peers, Self, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Overall, there was an increase in the percentage of time spent in joint engagement for the child with autism in the disclosure camp following disclosure, but data for the non-disclosure camp was more variable.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Ferguson & Shapiro, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr42">2016</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>6(6)</p><p>8 to 12</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD, AS, GAD, ODD, PDD-NOS, Tourette Syndrome</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-case design</p></td><td align="left"><p>Sportsmanship Skills (taking turns, giving verbal compliments, giving physical compliments, and making a positive postgame comment) and Soccer Skills (throw-ins, dribbling, passing, and wall volley); Social Skills Improvement System–Rating Scale (SSIS-RS); Self-Perception Profile for Children (SPPC); Soccer Knowledge and Interest Likert-Scale (SKILS)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Direct Observation, Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Following the soccer camp, participants improved their ability to take turns during soccer-related activities, provide verbal and physical compliments to their peers, and offer positive postgame comments. Participants were significantly better at accurately passing executing throw-ins and dribbling.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Fletcher et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr43">2018</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Museum</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>14(14)</p><p>4 to 18</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD, Sensory challenges</p></td><td align="left"><p>Qualitative,</p><p>Exploratory case study</p></td><td align="left"><p>Observations, interviews, field notes</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Direct Observation, Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Sensory gallery guides were beneficial for children with autism and sensory challenges, and families reported being able to stay longer using the guide. Visitors appreciated the connections between artworks and mapped routes and the flexible structure.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Flynn et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr44">2019</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>1392(1392)</p><p>3 to 20</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD, ASD, DD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Longitudinal</p></td><td align="left"><p>The Skills for Social Success</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation</p></td><td align="left"><p>Participants had significantly higher end-of-camp scores on all five social skills (communication, self-control, self-help, positive attitude, and relationship building) after the first year of camp. Additional years of camp were associated with continued positive increases in social skills.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Griswold et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr48">2014</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>18(8)</p><p>10 to 16</p></td><td align="left"><p>Tourette Syndrome</p></td><td align="left"><p>Qualitative,</p><p>Phenomenology</p></td><td align="left"><p>Focus groups, semi-structured interviews, observations</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self, staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Four major themes were identified: relatedness, social development, and programmatic outcomes. Subthemes were further identified: not alone and self-assurance, friendships, optimism, educational experience, bullying, and unique program opportunities and cabin bonding.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Guest et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr49">2017</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>13(13)</p><p>8 to 11</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD, ASD, DCD, PDD-NOS, Selective Mutism</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scales, 2nd edition; Social Skills Improvement System (SSIS)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Significant improvements in the Social Skills Domain of the Vineland, and physical self-perceptions from pre-test to follow-up. No significant group improvements in social skills were found using the SSIS.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Hartman & Owings, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr51">2021</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Gallery</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>9(9)</p><p>18 to 21</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Qualitative,</p><p>Case study</p></td><td align="left"><p>Artwork, artist statement, interviews, family and visitor responses</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Themes from participants included: positive changes in self-esteem and self-confidence, improved ability to practice self-regulation and self-soothing strategies, identity formation and self-understanding, and learning how to manage one's stress. Themes identified from parents' responses included: improved self-esteem, self-assuredness, personal expression, enhanced confidence, and individuality.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Herring et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr52">2022</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>107(107)</p><p>8 to 18</p></td><td align="left"><p>Stuttering</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>OASES</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>After 2 weeks at camp, there was a significant reduction in OASES scores related to negative reactions to stuttering, the adverse impact of stuttering on quality of life, and the overall adverse impact of stuttering. Improved quality of life and reduced adverse impact of stuttering were maintained 6 months post-camp.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Jia et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr54">2016</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>85(24)</p><p>6 to 9</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD, ODD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Longitudinal</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self-Perception Profile for Children (SPPC); Teacher's Rating Scale of Child's Actual Behavior (TRS); Peer Sociometric interviews; Teacher-Child Rating Scale (TCRS); Child-Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and Teacher-Report</p><p>Form (TRF)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Self, Teachers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Overly positive self-perceptions in children with ADHD predicted subsequent low peer preference and high oppositionality in a summer camp setting with previously unacquainted peers and counsellors. For typically developing children, overly positive self-perceptions did not predict any outcomes. For children with ADHD, lower parent ratings of behavioural competence also significantly predicted more oppositionality.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Kaboski et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr55">2015</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>16(8)</p><p>12 to 17</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Social Anxiety Scale for Children-Revised/Social Anxiety Scale Adolescents; Social Skills Improvement System; Robotics knowledge</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Summer robotics camp resulted in a significant reduction in self-reported social anxiety for adolescents with ASD and an increase in knowledge of robotics for adolescents with ASD and peers.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Kampmann & Bowne, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr56">2020</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>Not reported</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Devereux Early Childhood Assessment-Clinical Form (DECA-C)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Parents reported increases in protective factors and a reduction in behavioural concerns from pre- to post-intervention involving the Sanford Harmony Program.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Koegel et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr57">2019</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>4(4)</p><p>6 to 14</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-case design</p></td><td align="left"><p>social IEP goals (engagement, eye contact, turn-taking, verbal retelling)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation</p></td><td align="left"><p>All participants showed increases in social IEP goals during two weeks of inclusive camp.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Kong et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr58">2017</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Zoo</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>230(230)</p><p>9 to 22 +</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD, ASD, CP, Down syndrome</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>Survey, comments</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers</p></td><td align="left"><p>64% of families reported good to excellent levels of interactions with the staff. The level of interactions was reported to be improved because the staff members were more equipped and able to utilize the best methods to communicate.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Koudys et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr59">2022</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>22(22)</p><p>2 to 18</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Daily PECS Use; PECS Phase; Parent Ratings of Child Communicative Behavior in the Home and Community</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Direct Observation, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Participants used PECS to request a diverse array of items, across environments. Almost all participants used a higher phase of PECS post-camp in comparison to their pre-camp. Improvements in overall communicative behaviour and reductions in inappropriate behaviour were observed. Parents also reported generalization to the home and community.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Lang et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr61">2020</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>3(3)</p><p>6 to 12</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-case design</p></td><td align="left"><p>Stereotypy, play, variability of playground equipment use, and opportunities for social interaction</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation</p></td><td align="left"><p>The intervention increased the appropriate use of playground equipment and decreased stereotypy for all three children. An increase in the variety of playground equipment used was observed for all three participants</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Langa et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr62">2013</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Museum</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>10(10)</p><p>7 to 11</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Qualitative,</p><p>Exploratory case study</p></td><td align="left"><p>Surveys, interviews</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Parents are motivated to visit the museum primarily because of their child's interest and to have a meaningful family outing. Other motivators included engaging with others while visiting and being able to enjoy a relaxing visit. Further themes that emerged were related to parents' concerns over children exhibiting unpredictable behaviours, and crowds and big lines contributing to children's feelings of discomfort. The pre-visit materials were determined to be useful.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Lee et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr63">2016</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>42(42)</p><p>8 to 16</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD, Bipolar disorder, IDD, LD, PD, speech impairment</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Concept Mapping</p></td><td align="left"><p>Interviews, sorting, and rating</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Seven thematic concepts emerged: personal growth, nurturing relationships, non-judgemental environment and attitude, traditional/classic camp fun, beneficial and unique opportunities, learning/thinking with structures and rules, and independence and recognition, which suggests that children with disabilities experienced positive personal growth and learned new skills through the camp.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Liljenquist et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr64">2017</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Various informal settings</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>10(10)</p><p>14 to 22</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD, Down Syndrome, ID</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Descriptive</p></td><td align="left"><p>Participatory Experience Survey (PES); Setting Affordances Survey (SAS)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>PES and SAS were feasible measures for conducting programme evaluations. Independent observers were able to agree on the affordances within each setting. Opportunity for skill development was greater in more structured activities. Youth found all activity environments to be highly supportive.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Litchke & Hutson, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr65">2021</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>NR</p></td><td align="left"><p>29(29)</p><p>3 to 4</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD or at-risk</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Quasi-experimental, three-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>fun-o-meter (FOMS); PANAS-C; social personal relationship scale (SPRS)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation, Self, Teacher</p></td><td align="left"><p>Drumtastic and Kid Yoga Rocks groups resulted in significant pre- to post-test improvement in the PANAS Positive scale, whereas the control did not. Drumtastic and Kid Yoga Rocks groups resulted in increases in fun/mood experienced from pre to post-tests. There was no significant change in socialization with others for all groups.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Maich et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr67">2015</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>9(9)</p><p>5 to 10</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD, DD, PDD-NOS</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Autism Social</p><p>Skills Profile, Social interactions</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Increases in ASSP from pre to post. The number of interactions initiated by typically developing peers was greater than adults at post-treatment.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Michalski et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr72">2003</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>96(96)</p><p>Ages not reported</p></td><td align="left"><p>Learning Disabilities</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Pre-test, post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self-Esteem Index, Children's Loneliness Questionnaire, Social Skills Rating System, satisfaction</p><p>questionnaire, camp evaluation questionnaire, parent interviews</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Campers generally had positive experiences at camp and expressed high levels of satisfaction.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Mitchell et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr73">2015</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>20(20)</p><p>6 to 11</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group, repeated measures</p></td><td align="left"><p>Frequency of appropriate behaviours/ frequency of undesirable behaviours</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Direct Observation, Teachers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Children made improvements in paying attention to ongoing activities, following activity rules, contributing to group discussions, and reducing complaining/whining. Moderate to large improvements were also observed in increasing compliance with adult requests and reducing verbal abuse of others.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Mulligan et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr74">2013</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Museum</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>144 surveys, 5 interviews, 45 family observations</p><p>Ages not reported</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>Surveys, interviews, observations</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Families were satisfied with the Exploring Our Way program reporting the museum felt comfortable and safe, that the staff was helpful, and this allowed them to access exhibits for learning and practicing skills.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Na & Mikami, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr75">2018</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>137(24)</p><p>7 to 10</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Descriptive</p></td><td align="left"><p>Pre-existing perceptions of ADHD behaviours; Sociometrics; Teacher-Child Rating Scale</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Children's sociometric judgments about classmates with ADHD at the end of a 2-week summer program were predicted, in part, by their pre-existing perceptions of ADHD behaviours obtained on the first day. Greater ADHD severity was associated with greater "dislike" nominations.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Neprily & Climie, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr77">2023</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>81(81)</p><p>12 to 16</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative, single-group per-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Kamp Questionnaire; Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scale</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Significant increases in self-ratings of social competence from pre- to post-camp.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Quinn et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr80">2014</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>3(3)</p><p>8</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-case design</p></td><td align="left"><p>Compliance to adult initiated, group or individual directives, disruptive behaviour</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation</p></td><td align="left"><p>The reinforcement package increased the average percentage of compliance with adult directives and decreased in the average frequency of disruptive behaviour from baseline to intervention.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Rapp, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr81">2005</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Museum</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>18(6)</p><p>Elementary school age</p></td><td align="left"><p>Learning disability, ID</p></td><td align="left"><p>Qualitative,</p><p>Case study</p></td><td align="left"><p>Observations, interviews, surveys, documents, journal</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self, Teachers, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Benefits such as scaffolded instruction, meaningful and contextualized activities, self-regulated learning, the establishment of learning communities, play, and parental involvement were reported.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Schwartzberg & Silverman, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr86">2013</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>30(30)</p><p>9 to 21</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>RCT</p></td><td align="left"><p>Autism Social Skills Profile (ASSP); Comprehension Checks</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Music-based social stories resulted in mixed results on comprehension of the stories and social skills.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Simpson et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr90">2021</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>13(13)</p><p>14 to 17</p></td><td align="left"><p>ADHD, ASD, FASD, ODD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Qualitative,</p><p>Photovoice</p></td><td align="left"><p>Photographs, interviews</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Three major themes were identified: personal growth, life lessons, and I know how to do this. Subthemes included making friends, embracing oneself, building self-esteem, and focusing on the journey towards achieving a goal rather than on perfection.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Siperstein et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr91">2009</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Recreational programming</p></td><td align="left"><p>Y</p></td><td align="left"><p>67(29)</p><p>8 to 13</p></td><td align="left"><p>ID</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Peer hang-out-with and friendship inventory, sports skill assessment</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation, Self</p></td><td align="left"><p>Children with intellectual disabilities were just as likely as children without intellectual disabilities to be nominated by their nondisabled peers both in terms of who they liked to hang out with and as new friends. 95% of children without intellectual disabilities indicated that they liked to "hang out with" at least 1 child with an intellectual disability</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Thompson-Hodgetts et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr98">2023</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>15(15)</p><p>4 to 12</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed methods, mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>Observations, interviews</p></td><td align="left"><p>Direct Observation, Self, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Children in the camp who received autism education showed greater increases in joint engagement than those in the control group. Qualitative data suggest improved knowledge and understanding of autism by peers and staff.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Walker et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr104">2010</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>12(12)</p><p>3 to 7</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Adaptive Social Skills Measure (ASSM)-Parent Report/therapist report</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, Therapists</p></td><td align="left"><p>Parents and therapists reported significant positive changes in social skills from pre- to post-treatment.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Willemin et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr105">2018</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>14(14)</p><p>5 to 14</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Quantitative,</p><p>Single-group pre-test post-test</p></td><td align="left"><p>Observation, Social and Personal Relationship Scale (SPRS)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Self, Staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>After Drumtastic, children reported significantly higher ratings of fun at the post-test compared to the pre-test</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Yinger et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr107">2023</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>4(3)</p><p>5 to 8</p></td><td align="left"><p>ASD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed methods, mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>Interview, drawings, musical self-efficacy scale</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers, self, staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>Children showed no change in ratings of musical self-efficacy. Parents and children had positive perceptions of the camp.</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Zwicker et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr109">2015</xref></p></td><td align="left"><p>Camp</p></td><td align="left"><p>N</p></td><td align="left"><p>11(11)</p><p>5 to 8</p></td><td align="left"><p>DCD</p></td><td align="left"><p>Mixed Methods,</p><p>Mixed methods</p></td><td align="left"><p>DCDQ, COPM, PEGS (child and parent), CSAPPA, CAPE, online exit survey, interviews with parents</p></td><td align="left"><p>Caregivers</p></td><td align="left"><p>Statistically significant perceived improvements in the performance of child-chosen goals and satisfaction with performance. Parents reported that participation helped build their children's confidence and enabled them to try new activities. There was no change in the overall participation patterns of the children.</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <emph>ADHD</emph> Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; <emph>AS</emph> Asperger syndrome; <emph>ASD</emph> Autism spectrum disorder; <emph>CP</emph> Cerebral palsy; <emph>DCD</emph> Developmental coordination disorder; <emph>DD</emph> Developmental disability; <emph>HFASD</emph> High-functioning autism spectrum disorder; <emph>ID</emph> Intellectual disability; <emph>SB</emph> Spina Bifida; <emph>PDD-NOS</emph> Pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified; <emph>GAD</emph> Generalized anxiety disorder; <emph>ODD</emph> Oppositional defiant disorder</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-6">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0180830221-7">RQ1: What Research Exists Concerning the Participation of Individuals with Neurodevelopmental...</hd> <p>A total of 51 studies were included in this scoping review. Studies included a total of 3,965 participants with 3,017 children having one or more neurodevelopmental disorders. Table 2 summarizes the study characteristics and main findings. Participants with neurodevelopmental disabilities ranged from 2-22 years old. One study reported included a small number of adults among a primarily child population (Kong et al., [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref81">58</reflink>]). The most included diagnoses were ASD and ADHD. Most studies were conducted in camps (<emph>n</emph> = 39), followed by museums (<emph>n</emph> = 6). Twenty-six (51.0%) of the studies took place in inclusive settings, where children with and without neurodevelopmental disabilities were present. The studies took place in the United States (<emph>n</emph> = 39), Canada (<emph>n</emph> = 9), and Europe (<emph>n</emph> = 3).</p> <p>More than half of the studies employed quantitative approaches (<emph>n</emph> = 29, 56.86%), nine were qualitative studies (17.65%) and 13 were mixed methods studies (25.49%). Quantitative studies used designs including single group pretest-post-test designs (<emph>n</emph> = 14), single case experimental designs (<emph>n</emph> = 5), descriptive studies (<emph>n</emph> = 3), longitudinal studies (<emph>n</emph> = 2), quasi-experimental studies (<emph>n</emph> = 2), randomized controlled trials (<emph>n</emph> = 1), and social network analyses (<emph>n</emph> = 1)<emph>.</emph> Qualitative studies used different data collection methods including focus groups, semi-structured interviews, observations, photographs, and document review. Quantitative studies used standardized assessments, surveys, and direct observations. Mixed method studies used surveys, concept mapping, interviews, observations, and standardized assessments. Studies primarily relied on children with neurodevelopmental disabilities as informants (<emph>n</emph> = 31), followed by caregivers (<emph>n</emph> = 26) and direct observation (<emph>n</emph> = 17). Others included staff (<emph>n</emph> = 13), teachers (<emph>n</emph> = 4), peers (<emph>n</emph> =1), and therapists (<emph>n</emph> = 1).</p> <p>Eighteen (35.29%) of the articles detailed the effects of therapeutic or specialized camps for individuals with neurodevelopmental disabilities, including ten camps designed to address symptoms of neurodevelopmental disabilities, three residential camps, six sports camps, two music camps and one robotics camp. Four (8.6%) studies reported the effects of inclusive camps or programs. Fourteen (27.4%) studies reported on the effects of specific supports or interventions taking place in an IES such as behavioural interventions, visual aids, and staff training. Five studies (10.9%) reported on special events or programs taking place in museums and galleries such as sensory nights. Ten studies (21.7%) were descriptive, outlining experiences in inclusive settings or community settings, or describing characteristics of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities as they relate to inclusion and participation in IES.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-8">RQ2: What Strategies are Used to Foster Participation in Informal Education Settings for Chil...</hd> <p>All but one article (<emph>n</emph> = 50, 98.0 %) described one or more strategies to support the participation of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities in informal education settings (Table 3). Blachman and Hinshaw ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref82">12</reflink>]) reported no practices to promote inclusion, reporting only on the friendship patterns of children with ADHD participating in a camp. Forty-four different practices to foster participation in informal education settings were described. The most frequently described practices were targeted curricula (<emph>n</emph> = 18), staff training (<emph>n</emph> = 17) and the ratio of staff to students (<emph>n</emph> = 14). Many of the practices were behavioural, including reinforcement or token economy systems, social skills training, shaping, visual support, modelling, prompting, picture exchange communication systems, and behavioural skills training. Three of the most frequently named practices involved staff.</p> <p>Table 3 Percent and number of studies reporting practices used to promote participation and inclusion (<emph>n</emph> = 46)</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"><p><bold>Intervention type</bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold><italic>n</italic></bold></p></th><th align="left"><p><bold>%</bold></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>Targeted curriculum</p></td><td align="left"><p>18</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>35.3%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Staff Training</p></td><td align="left"><p>17</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>33.3%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Ratio of staff to students</p></td><td align="left"><p>14</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>27.5%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Group activities</p></td><td align="left"><p>10</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>19.6%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Qualified staff</p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>17.6%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>None</p></td><td align="left"><p>8</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>15.7%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Reinforcement or token economy</p></td><td align="left"><p>7</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>13.7%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Social story</p></td><td align="left"><p>6</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>11.8%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Sport or movement instruction</p></td><td align="left"><p>6</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>11.8%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Social skills training</p></td><td align="left"><p>5</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>9.8%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Exclusive space</p></td><td align="left"><p>5</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>9.8%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Inclusive space</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>7.8%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Peer mediated intervention</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>7.8%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Scaffolding or shaping</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>7.8%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Visual supports</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>7.8%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Modelling</p></td><td align="left"><p>3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>5.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Sensory intervention</p></td><td align="left"><p>3</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>5.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Coping skills instruction</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Behavioral interventions</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Repeated practice</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Music therapy</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Prompting</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Therapy from regulated professional</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>3.9%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Behavioral Skills Training (BST)</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>SENSE theatre intervention</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Parent training</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Disability awareness training</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Free admission</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Kid yoga rocks</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Positive behavioral support</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Disability awareness training</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Self-management</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Drumtastic</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Sensory friendly</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Co-construction</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Physically accessible</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Response cost</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Group counseling</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Robot programming</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Priming</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Sanford harmony curriculum</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Picture exchange communication system</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Art based</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Policies related to inclusion</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td char="." align="char"><p>2.0%</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0180830221-9">RQ3: What are the Outcomes of These Strategies on Participation?</hd> <p>An analysis of the main findings from the studies in this scoping review suggests the following results.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-10">Children with Neurodevelopmental Disabilities Continue to Experience Barriers to Participatio...</hd> <p>Descriptive studies covered several different outcomes related to participation and inclusion, indicating children with neurodevelopmental disabilities continue to experience barriers in these settings. Three studies (Blachman & Hinshaw, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref83">12</reflink>]; Jia et al., [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref84">54</reflink>]; Na & Mikami, [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref85">75</reflink>]) focused on the participation and inclusion of children with ADHD using sociometric nominations, finding that children with ADHD had fewer and lower-quality friendships in a camp context (Blachman & Hinshaw, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref86">12</reflink>]). Na and Mikami ([<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref87">75</reflink>]) found judgments about children with ADHD were partially predicted by pre-existing perceptions of ADHD. Finally, overly positive self-perceptions predicted lower peer preference among children with ADHD (Jia et al., [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref88">54</reflink>]).</p> <p>As a result of a social network analysis, one study found that less than half of the children with neurodevelopmental disabilities at a residential therapeutic camp reported true reciprocal relationships with other individuals at the camp (Dawson et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref89">28</reflink>]).</p> <p>Liljenquist et al. ([<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref90">64</reflink>]) evaluated the feasibility of the Participatory Experience Survey and the Setting Affordances Survey to evaluate participation in a zoo setting, in addition to an art project and track practice. They found structured programs resulted in the most opportunities for skill development, with the zoo having the fewest opportunities. They also found the zoo experience was the least preferred, and that participants indicated wanting to talk to others, yet not being able to at the zoo, more so than the other settings.</p> <p>One descriptive study investigated the informal learning opportunities of children from birth to 6 with and without developmental disabilities using observations, interviews with caregivers, and artifactual evidence. They found no differences in the number of family and community activities engaged in between the two groups. They also found that children without developmental delays experienced significantly more learning opportunities in community settings than those with developmental delays (Dunst, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref91">37</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-11">Specialized and Therapeutic Camps Increase Social Skills and Positive Self-Perceptions</hd> <p>Twelve studies showed that social skills increased following attending specialized camps for children with neurodevelopmental disabilities (Cei et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref92">18</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref93">19</reflink>]; Eaton et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref94">38</reflink>]; Ferguson & Shapiro, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref95">42</reflink>]; Flynn et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref96">44</reflink>]; Guest et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref97">49</reflink>]; Kampmann & Bowne, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref98">56</reflink>]; Michalski et al., [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref99">72</reflink>]; Mitchell et al., [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref100">73</reflink>]; Neprily & Climie, [<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref101">77</reflink>]; Simpson et al., [<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref102">90</reflink>]; Walker et al., [<reflink idref="bib104" id="ref103">104</reflink>]) and that attendance was associated with decreases in social anxiety (Kaboski et al., [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref104">55</reflink>]). Measures of social skills included direct observations, standardized measures such as the Social Skills Improvement System as well as measures developed for the study (e.g. Kamp Questionnaire). Others also demonstrated increases in positive self-perceptions and self-esteem after attending specialized camps (Aggerholm & Moltke Martiny, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref105">3</reflink>]; Després et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref106">31</reflink>]; Eaton et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref107">38</reflink>]; Guest et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref108">49</reflink>]; Herring et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref109">52</reflink>]; Michalski et al., [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref110">72</reflink>]; Simpson et al., [<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref111">90</reflink>]; Zwicker et al., [<reflink idref="bib109" id="ref112">109</reflink>]). In addition to changes in skills that support participation and inclusion, several studies (<emph>n</emph> = 6) focused on participant perceptions of specialized camps, finding they provide an opportunity for children with neurodevelopmental disabilities to be themselves, free from judgement (Aggerholm & Moltke Martiny, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref113">3</reflink>]; Griswold et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref114">48</reflink>]; Simpson et al., [<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref115">90</reflink>]), that they are enjoyable (Michalski et al., [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref116">72</reflink>]; Yinger et al., [<reflink idref="bib107" id="ref117">107</reflink>]), and that they facilitate friendship making (Griswold et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref118">48</reflink>]).</p> <p>One study compared the effects of a specialized camp to one for children without neurodevelopmental disabilities (D'Eloia & Sibthorp, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref119">27</reflink>]). They found the changes attributed to camp in general were greater than the changes associated with the type of camp. Both camps engaged children in meaningful roles, provided opportunities to learn new skills, presented challenging experiences, provided opportunities to observe and engage as role models, and social experiences with peers. Youth with disabilities across both types of camps reported fewer social opportunities.</p> <p>Three of the therapeutic camps were also inclusive (Kaboski et al., [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref120">55</reflink>]; Kampmann & Bowne, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref121">56</reflink>]; Siperstein et al., [<reflink idref="bib91" id="ref122">91</reflink>]). These camps were designed to support children with disabilities through peer-mediated learning or shared therapeutic experiences. These camps resulted in the inclusion of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities such as being nominated by peers as friends or as someone they like to "hang out with" (Siperstein et al., [<reflink idref="bib91" id="ref123">91</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-12">Behavioural Supports Result in Increases in Social Skills and Decreases in Interfering Behavi...</hd> <p>Ten studies outlined the effects of various practices for participation and inclusion within inclusive camps (Corbett et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref124">24</reflink>]; Koegel et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref125">57</reflink>]; Lang et al., [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref126">61</reflink>]; Maich et al., [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref127">67</reflink>]; Thompson-Hodgetts et al., [<reflink idref="bib98" id="ref128">98</reflink>]) and specialized camps (Koudys et al., [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref129">59</reflink>]; Quinn et al., [<reflink idref="bib80" id="ref130">80</reflink>]; Schwartzberg & Silverman, [<reflink idref="bib86" id="ref131">86</reflink>]; Willemin et al., [<reflink idref="bib105" id="ref132">105</reflink>]) which resulted in increases in social skills and communication and decreases in interfering behaviour measured via direct observation and the Autism Social Skills profile. These supports were most often behavioural, including Picture Exchange Communication systems, reinforcement and token economies, and peer-mediated interventions. Other strategies included disability awareness training, music therapy, social stories, and increasing staff-to-student ratios.</p> <p>Three studies (Fletcher et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref133">43</reflink>]; Kong et al., [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref134">58</reflink>]; Langa et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref135">62</reflink>]) outlined supports provided in a museum context including web-based support for autism (Langa et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref136">62</reflink>]) and sensory gallery guides (Fletcher et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref137">43</reflink>]). One study outlined support for children with disabilities in a zoo context, including a staff sensory training program, implementing quiet zones, and providing sensory bags (Kong et al., [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref138">58</reflink>]). These studies found families had positive perceptions of the support, that they allowed them to stay longer (Fletcher et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref139">43</reflink>]), and that they resulted in better staff interactions (Kong et al., [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref140">58</reflink>]). Rapp ([<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref141">81</reflink>]) presented a case study of several students with neurodevelopmental disabilities in a children's museum, highlighting practices that might support participation and inclusion in this context. They identify scaffolded instruction, meaningful and contextualized activities, the presence of a learning community, and the ability to self-direct learning and play as important aspects of facilitating inclusion.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-13">Caregivers and Children with Neurodevelopmental Disabilities Have Positive Attitudes Toward S...</hd> <p>Five studies looked at providing specialized programming or events in informal settings, primarily museums and galleries (Alper, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref142">4</reflink>]; Deng, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref143">29</reflink>]; Doody & Patti, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref144">36</reflink>]; Hartman, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref145">50</reflink>]; Mulligan et al., [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref146">74</reflink>]). These events were generally perceived as beneficial by caregivers and children (Alper, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref147">4</reflink>]; Doody & Patti, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref148">36</reflink>]; Mulligan et al., [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref149">74</reflink>]) and respondents indicated these events and programs are predictable and non-judgemental (Alper, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref150">4</reflink>]; Doody & Patti, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref151">36</reflink>]; Mulligan et al., [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref152">74</reflink>]). Participation in these specialized events and programs was also associated with increases in self-esteem, self-confidence (Hartman, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref153">50</reflink>]), and social skills (Deng, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref154">29</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-14">Inclusive Camps Have Both Positive and Negative Outcomes for Campers with Neurodevelopmental...</hd> <p>Three studies reported on camps with a focus on the inclusion of campers with and without neurodevelopmental disabilities, two of which used concept mapping (Dipeolu et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref155">35</reflink>]; Fan et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref156">41</reflink>]; Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref157">63</reflink>]). These studies found similar themes in areas of personal growth, relationships, non-judgmental environments and attitudes, classic camp fun, new experiences, and acceptance of self and others (Dipeolu et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref158">35</reflink>]; Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref159">63</reflink>]).</p> <p>One study looked at a case study of the effects of disclosure of a diagnosis of autism in a camp setting, finding disclosure was associated with increased peer engagement and reciprocal interactions, which was not found for the camp where the child did not disclose their diagnosis (Fan et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref160">41</reflink>]).</p> <p>Devine and Parr ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref161">33</reflink>]) examined an inclusive camp in the context of social capital (i.e., gaining benefits from membership in a social network or structure [Portes, [<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref162">79</reflink>]]). They highlight how an inclusive camp setting may contribute to the weak social capital of people with disabilities, despite their good intentions, because campers without disability view themselves as allowing or letting campers with disabilities participate and the perception that campers with disabilities have less to offer to the group. On the other hand, the inclusive camp context served as a bridging context for campers with and without disabilities, necessary for building social capital.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-15">Discussion</hd> <p>This scoping review examined the empirical evidence related to inclusion and participation in IES for children with neurodevelopmental disorders, practices used to promote inclusion and participation and their outcomes. Fifty-one studies were included in which more than half the studies employed quantitative approaches. Forty-four different practices to foster inclusion were identified, with the most frequent being staff training. Quantitative and qualitative outcomes demonstrated that children with neurodevelopmental disabilities continue to experience barriers to participation and inclusion in informal settings, specialized and therapeutic camps increase social skills and positive self-perceptions, behavioural supports result in increases in social skills and decreases in interfering behaviour in informal settings, caregivers and children with neurodevelopmental disabilities have positive attitudes toward specialized programming in informal education settings, and inclusive camps have both positive and negative outcomes for campers with neurodevelopmental disabilities.</p> <p>Most of the research on IES for children with neurodevelopmental disorders within this scoping review took place in camp settings in the United States. Various camp settings were described within the studies, including inclusive, therapeutic and specialized camps (such as sports camps for children with disabilities). Historically, camp opportunities for children with disabilities have been in segregated settings with no campers without disabilities (Blake, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref163">13</reflink>]) and the majority of the camps described in this review were specialized or therapeutic programs designed for children with neurodevelopmental disabilities. For some scholars, inclusion is not achieved when it takes place among groups of others with neurodevelopmental disabilities, yet people with neurodevelopmental disabilities report valuing relationships with staff (Clarkson et al., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref164">22</reflink>]) and other people with disabilities (McVilly et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref165">69</reflink>]). We take a broad perspective of participation and inclusion; rather than insisting that "the community" in which people with disabilities participate and are included in be restricted to those without disabilities (Cushing, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref166">26</reflink>]; Simplican et al., [<reflink idref="bib89" id="ref167">89</reflink>]). The literature reviewed indicated that programs designed for children with neurodevelopmental disabilities allow them to connect with other children with disabilities, identify and confirm aspects of their identity, and may be important for disability culture (Aggerholm & Moltke Martiny, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref168">3</reflink>]; Clark & Nwokah, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref169">21</reflink>]; Simpson et al., [<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref170">90</reflink>]; Zwicker et al., [<reflink idref="bib109" id="ref171">109</reflink>]). Further, some of the studies in this review reported on negative aspects of inclusive camps, including rejection from nondisabled peers, producing feelings of isolation, loneliness, and marginalization for campers with neurodevelopmental disabilities (Devine & Parr, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref172">33</reflink>]). This research suggests encouraging and sustaining a variety of options, including inclusive and specialized or therapeutic programs, is likely to support and enhance inclusion (Cushing, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref173">26</reflink>]).</p> <p>Overall, the outcomes reported in this review support that both inclusive and specialized camp experiences provide benefits to campers with neurodevelopmental disabilities. Benefits of attending camp include growth in social skills, communication, adaptive behaviour, independence, and self-esteem (Dipeolu et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref174">35</reflink>]; Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref175">63</reflink>]; Zwicker et al., [<reflink idref="bib109" id="ref176">109</reflink>]). The versatility of programming and the ability to modify camp schedules, recreational activities, and supports may make them ideal for investigating practices for increasing participation and inclusion in children with neurodevelopmental disorders. For example, Griswold et al. ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref177">48</reflink>]) found that participants experienced positive social experiences through specialized programs (i.e., themed twilight activities, cabin periods, and challenges course activities) during a weeklong inclusive camp for children with Tourette syndrome. These positive experiences increased engagement between campers and camp staff (Griswold et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref178">48</reflink>]). Similar sentiments were also reported by Aggerholm and Moltke Martiny ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref179">3</reflink>]), who found that participants focused on the social relations established at the camp and through experiencing an inclusive camp for other individuals living with cerebral palsy, they felt a sense of belonging that they generally did not feel outside of the camp setting.</p> <p>Another trend that emerged in our review was the overrepresentation of some disability groups relative to others. There have been analyses that note that publication frequency is not strongly related to the prevalence of neurodevelopmental disabilities, with certain disabilities being underrepresented (e.g. dyslexia) relative to others such as ADHD and Autism (Bishop & Morty, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref180">11</reflink>]). This was the case in the research included in our review. ADHD and Autism may have seen increasing representation in research due to changing diagnostic criteria and prevalence in addition to increased research funding being directed in this area. Further, research tends to focus on areas where there are more severe symptoms. In our review, only one study focused on communication disorders (Herring et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref181">52</reflink>]), potentially because speech disorders, although persistent, may have less of an impact on social or education functioning than diagnoses such as autism.</p> <p>Training emerged as an important aspect of promoting participation and inclusion in informal education settings, identified in 17 of the studies as a practice for supporting inclusion or participation. Its importance is also echoed in comments from caregivers and other stakeholders (Alper, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref182">4</reflink>]; Kong et al., [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref183">58</reflink>]; Langa et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref184">62</reflink>]). Staff play an important role in the inclusion of people with disabilities in informal education settings (Chiscano & Jiménez-Zarco, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref185">20</reflink>]) with staff acting as both a barrier and a facilitator of participation. Included studies reported that a lack of training and knowledge on the needs and wants of individuals with disabilities limits staff in IES from creating inclusive experiences (Chiscano & Jiménez-Zarco, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref186">20</reflink>]). For example, Kulik and Fletcher ([<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref187">60</reflink>]) found that 60% of staff and volunteers in a fine arts museum had not received any training for working with children with ASD or other needs, while 80% of these participants expressed a desire for training in this area (Kulik & Fletcher, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref188">60</reflink>]). More work is needed on the development and evaluation of training resources for staff to support inclusive programming in IES. This is not unique to IES; many report there is a need for additional research on the inclusion of people with neurodevelopmental disabilities in areas such as medicine (Ceglio et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref189">17</reflink>]) and law enforcement (Sreckovic et al., [<reflink idref="bib95" id="ref190">95</reflink>]). Reviews in these areas suggest that training programs that offer direct experiences and opportunities for people with neurodevelopmental disabilities to share their views are beneficial (Ceglio et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref191">17</reflink>]).</p> <p>Participation in community settings is often a concern among those with neurodevelopmental disabilities, particularly for those with intellectual and developmental disabilities (Merrells et al., [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref192">70</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref193">71</reflink>]; Shields et al., [<reflink idref="bib87" id="ref194">87</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref195">88</reflink>]). However, only one of the studies in this review sought to characterize the level of participation of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities relative to those without ((Blachman & Hinshaw, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref196">12</reflink>]). This might be a reflection of the quality of the literature in this area, with little of the research including comparison groups or experimental designs. This review highlights the dearth of systematic data collected on how, how often, and through what practices inclusion of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities are being included in IES.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-16">Future Directions</hd> <p>Research investigating community inclusion, including in IES, should continue to include measures of the degree of and the quality of participation. Given the complexities of participation and inclusion, multiple sources of information are needed to understand the experiences of inclusion. The degree of participation and inclusion is often assessed via quantitative measures, such as the number and frequency of social contacts or activities. Research measures also need to capture the subjective experiences of participants. Most of the studies assessing the effects of individual practices on participation and inclusion relied on standardized measures (e.g., Social Skills Improvement System), which do not fully represent the subjective experiences of the participants. Qualitative measures, such as interviews and photovoice provided rich data on the subjective experience, the meaning, and the personal values related to participating in informal education settings (e.g., Simpson et al., [<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref197">90</reflink>]). Future work that includes this information would support our understanding of how practices promoting participation and inclusion affect feelings of belonging (Fulton et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref198">46</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-17">Limitations</hd> <p>There are some limitations to this scoping review. First, a quality assessment of the included articles was not performed; all articles were included if they met the eligibility criteria. This may have implications for the strength of the findings presented in the review. Second, our search terms related to IES may not have captured all informal education spaces. Given that IES has a broad definition as 'places in which learning and education occur outside of a formal classroom,' there may be additional settings which were not included. Third, grey literature was excluded from this study; therefore, publication bias may have limited the number and diversity of articles included and discussed. Fourth, the majority of identified studies were conducted in the USA at camps and therefore the findings may have more limited applicability in countries where disability support policies and service provisions differ. It is unclear how these practices may translate to IES other than camps such as aquariums or science centres. Finally, multiple studies included participants with a diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders and other co-morbidities or participants with disabilities other than neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g. Ferguson & Shapiro, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref199">42</reflink>]; Lee et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref200">63</reflink>]). The diverse samples combined with the lack of controlled studies make it difficult to compare outcomes across studies. More rigorous empirical studies with comparable samples are needed to build a knowledge base on best practices for promoting inclusion at IES. Finally, our definition of IES was limited to particular settings including museums, camps, zoos, aquariums, libraries and science centres. IES is a broad term that includes learning that occurs in the home, and workplaces among many other locations which were beyond the scope of this review. Additional research is required to capture the breadth of these experiences.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-18">Conclusion</hd> <p>This scoping literature review provides an overview of the current practices supporting inclusion and participation for children with neurodevelopmental disorders within IES. Children with neurodevelopmental disabilities continue to experience barriers to inclusion in IES. At this time, there is some evidence to suggest that there are benefits of behavioural and other supports in promoting inclusion and participation within IES. Further, this review also highlights the importance of considering how specialized programming contributes to the participation and inclusion of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities. There is a continued need to explore practices to promote inclusion and participation in informal education settings, considering both the degree and the quality of inclusion, as well as the subjective experiences of those practices.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-19">Funding</hd> <p>This work was supported by a SSHRC Partnership Engage Grant (#892-2019-3048) awarded to the second author.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-20">Data Availability</hd> <p>The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-21">Compliance with Ethical Standards</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0180830221-22">Conflict of Interest</hd> <p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-23">Ethical Approval</hd> <p>This study did not involve human or non-human participants and therefore, ethical approval was not required.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-24">Informed Consent</hd> <p>This manuscript did not include human participants so informed consent was not obtained.</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-25">Appendix</hd> <p>Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist</p> <p></p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"><p>Section</p></th><th align="left"><p>Item</p></th><th align="left"><p>PRISMA-ScR checklist item</p></th><th align="left"><p>REPORTED ON PAGE #</p></th></tr><tr><th align="left" colspan="4"><p>Title</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>  Title</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td><td align="left"><p>Identify the report as a scoping review.</p></td><td align="left"><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="4"><p>Abstract</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Structured summary</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td><td align="left"><p>Provide a structured summary that includes (as applicable): background, objectives, eligibility criteria, sources of evidence, charting methods, results, and conclusions that relate to the review questions and objectives.</p></td><td align="left"><p>2</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="4"><p>Introduction</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Rationale</p></td><td align="left"><p>3</p></td><td align="left"><p>Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. Explain why the review questions/objectives lend themselves to a scoping review approach.</p></td><td align="left"><p>7-8</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Objectives</p></td><td align="left"><p>4</p></td><td align="left"><p>Provide an explicit statement of the questions and objectives being addressed with reference to their key elements (e.g., population or participants, concepts, and context) or other relevant key elements used to conceptualize the review questions and/or objectives.</p></td><td align="left"><p>8</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="4"><p>Methods</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Protocol and registration</p></td><td align="left"><p>5</p></td><td align="left"><p>Indicate whether a review protocol exists; state if and where it can be accessed (e.g., a Web address); and if available, provide registration information, including the registration number.</p></td><td align="left"><p>N/A</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Eligibility criteria</p></td><td align="left"><p>6</p></td><td align="left"><p>Specify characteristics of the sources of evidence used as eligibility criteria (e.g., years considered, language, and publication status), and provide a rationale.</p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Information sources*</p></td><td align="left"><p>7</p></td><td align="left"><p>Describe all information sources in the search (e.g., databases with dates of coverage and contact with authors to identify additional sources), as well as the date the most recent search was executed.</p></td><td align="left"><p>8-9</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Search</p></td><td align="left"><p>8</p></td><td align="left"><p>Present the full electronic search strategy for at least 1 database, including any limits used, such that it could be repeated.</p></td><td align="left"><p>8-9</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Selection of sources of evidence<sup>a</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td><td align="left"><p>State the process for selecting sources of evidence (i.e., screening and eligibility) included in the scoping review.</p></td><td align="left"><p>9</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Data charting process<sup>b</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>10</p></td><td align="left"><p>Describe the methods of charting data from the included sources of evidence (e.g., calibrated forms or forms that have been tested by the team before their use, and whether data charting was done independently or in duplicate) and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.</p></td><td align="left"><p>9-10</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Data items</p></td><td align="left"><p>11</p></td><td align="left"><p>List and define all variables for which data were sought and any assumptions and simplifications made.</p></td><td align="left"><p>9-10</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Critical appraisal of individual sources of evidence<sup>c</sup></p></td><td align="left"><p>12</p></td><td align="left"><p>If done, provide a rationale for conducting a critical appraisal of included sources of evidence; describe the methods used and how this information was used in any data synthesis (if appropriate).</p></td><td align="left"><p>N/A</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Synthesis of results</p></td><td align="left"><p>13</p></td><td align="left"><p>Describe the methods of handling and summarizing the data that were charted.</p></td><td align="left"><p>9-10</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="4"><p>Results</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Selection of sources of evidence</p></td><td align="left"><p>14</p></td><td align="left"><p>Give numbers of sources of evidence screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally using a flow diagram.</p></td><td align="left"><p>43</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Characteristics of sources of evidence</p></td><td align="left"><p>15</p></td><td align="left"><p>For each source of evidence, present characteristics for which data were charted and provide the citations.</p></td><td align="left"><p>22-44</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Critical appraisal within sources of evidence</p></td><td align="left"><p>16</p></td><td align="left"><p>If done, present data on critical appraisal of included sources of evidence (see item 12).</p></td><td align="left"><p>N/A</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Results of individual sources of evidence</p></td><td align="left"><p>17</p></td><td align="left"><p>For each included source of evidence, present the relevant data that were charted that relate to the review questions and objectives.</p></td><td align="left"><p>24-40</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Synthesis of results</p></td><td align="left"><p>18</p></td><td align="left"><p>Summarize and/or present the charting results as they relate to the review questions and objectives.</p></td><td align="left"><p>9-15</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="4"><p>Discussion</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Summary of evidence</p></td><td align="left"><p>19</p></td><td align="left"><p>Summarize the main results (including an overview of concepts, themes, and types of evidence available), link to the review questions and objectives, and consider the relevance to key groups.</p></td><td align="left"><p>10-17</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Limitations</p></td><td align="left"><p>20</p></td><td align="left"><p>Discuss the limitations of the scoping review process.</p></td><td align="left"><p>21-22</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Conclusions</p></td><td align="left"><p>21</p></td><td align="left"><p>Provide a general interpretation of the results with respect to the review questions and objectives, as well as potential implications and/or next steps.</p></td><td align="left"><p>22</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="4"><p>Funding</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>  Funding</p></td><td align="left"><p>22</p></td><td align="left"><p>Describe sources of funding for the included sources of evidence, as well as sources of funding for the scoping review. Describe the role of the funders of the scoping review.</p></td><td align="left"><p>3</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <emph>JBI</emph> Joanna Briggs Institute; <emph>PRISMA-ScR</emph> Preferred Reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews</p> <p>* Where <emph>sources of evidence</emph> (see second footnote) are compiled from, such as bibliographic databases, social media platforms, and Web sites</p> <p> <sups>a</sups>A more inclusive/heterogeneous term used to account for the different types of evidence or data sources (e.g., quantitative and/or qualitative research, expert opinion, and policy documents) that may be eligible in a scoping review as opposed to only studies. This is not to be confused with <emph>information sources</emph> (see first footnote)</p> <p> <sups>b</sups>The frameworks by Arksey and O'Malley (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref201">6</reflink>) and Levac and colleagues (<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref202">7</reflink>) and the JBI guidance (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref203">4</reflink>, 5) refer to the process of data extraction in a scoping review as data charting<emph>.</emph></p> <p> <sups>c</sups>The process of systematically examining research evidence to assess its validity, results, and relevance before using it to inform a decision. This term is used for items 12 and 19 instead of "risk of bias" (which is more applicable to systematic reviews of interventions) to include and acknowledge the various sources of evidence that may be used in a scoping review (e.g., quantitative and/or qualitative research, expert opinion, and policy document)</p> <p> <emph>From:</emph> Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O'Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMAScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169:467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850</p> <hd id="AN0180830221-26">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0180830221-27"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref22" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, no. S.O. 2005, c. 11. (2005). https://<ulink href="http://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/01o32">www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/01o32</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref23" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Accessible Canada Act, no. SC 2019, c. 10. (2019). https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/a-0.6/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref35" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Aggerholm K, Moltke Martiny KM. Yes, we can! A phenomenological study of a sports camp for young people with cerebral palsy. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly. 2017; 34; 4: 362-381. 10.1123/apaq.2015-0135. 28942669</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref36" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Alper M. Critical media access studies: Deconstructing power, visibility, and marginality in mediated space. International Journal of Communication. 2021; 15: 840-861</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref3" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Amado AN, Stancliffe RJ, McCarron M, McCallion P. Social inclusion and community participation of individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. 2013; 51; 5: 360-375. 10.1352/1934-9556-51.5.360. 24303823</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref14" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> American Camp Association. (2021). 2021 Impact Report. Martinsville, IN: Author. Retrieved from https://<ulink href="http://www.acacamps.org/sites/default/files/page%5fdocuments/about/2021-ACA-Impact-Report.pdf">www.acacamps.org/sites/default/files/page%5fdocuments/about/2021-ACA-Impact-Report.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref1" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 20135; American Psychiatric Association. 10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref24" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (1990). <ulink href="http://www.ada.gov/archive/adastat91.htm">www.ada.gov/archive/adastat91.htm</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref64" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Andrews J, Falkmer M, Girdler S. Community participation interventions for children and adolescents with a neurodevelopmental intellectual disability: A systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2015; 37; 10: 825-833. 10.3109/09638288.2014.944625. 25070651</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005; 8; 1: 19-32. 10.1080/1364557032000119616</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bishop DVM, Morty RE. Which neurodevelopmental disorders get researched and why?. PLoS ONE. 2010; 5; 11: e15112. 10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0015112. 21152085. 2994844</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blachman DR, Hinshaw SP. Patterns of friendship among girls with and without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2002; 30; 6 PG-625–640: 625-640. 10.1023/A:1020815814973. 12481976</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blake J. Opening doors: Integration of persons with a disability in organized children's camping in Canada. Journal of Leisurability. 1996; 23: 3-10</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boyd, C. M, Fraiman, J. L, Hawkins, K. A, Labin, J. M, Sutter, M. B, & Wahl, M. R. (2008). Effects of the STAR intervention program on interactions between campers with and without disabilities during inclusive summer day camp activities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 43(1), 92–101. https://<ulink href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/23879746">www.jstor.org/stable/23879746</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cameron LA, Borland RL, Tonge BJ, Gray KM. Community participation in adults with autism: A systematic review. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities. 2022; 35; 2: 421-447. 10.1111/jar.12970. 34907624</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cameron LA, Tonge BJ, Howlin P, Einfeld SL, Stancliffe RJ, Gray KM. Social and community inclusion outcomes for adults with autism with and without intellectual disability in Australia. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 2022; 66; 7: 655-666. 10.1111/jir.12953. 35677963. 9328353</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ceglio K, Rispoli MJ, Flake EM. Training medical professionals to work with patients with neurodevelopmental disorders: A systematic review. Developmental Neurorehabilitation. 2020; 23; 7: 463-473. 10.1080/17518423.2020.1777217. 32543301</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cei A, Ruscello B, Sepio D. Summer camp for children with ASD and parents' perception of changes in psycho-social skills. International Journal of Sport Psychology. 2019; 50: 162-175. 10.7352/IJSP.2019.50.162</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cei A, Ruscello B, Sepio D. The role of football in enhancing psychosocial skills in youth with autism spectrum disorder. International Journal of Sport. 2023; 54: 373-388. 10.7352/IJSP.2023.54.373</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chiscano MC, Jiménez-Zarco AI. Towards an inclusive museum management strategy. An exploratory study of consumption experience in visitors with disabilities. The case of the CosmoCaixa Science Museum. Sustainability. 2021; 13; 2: 660. 10.3390/SU13020660</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clark, M. K, & Nwokah, E. E. (2011). Play and learning in summer camps for children with special needs. American Journal of Play, 238–261.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clarkson R, Murphy GH, Coldwell JB, Dawson DL. What characteristics do service users with intellectual disability value in direct support staff within residential forensic services?. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability. 2009; 34; 4: 283-289. 10.3109/13668250903285630</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cobigo, V, Ouellette-Kuntz, H, Lysaght, R, & Martin, L. (2012). Shifting our conceptualization of social inclusion. Stigma Research and Action, 2(2), 75–84. <ulink href="http://stigmaj.org/article/view/45">http://stigmaj.org/article/view/45</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Corbett BA, Swain DM, Coke C, Simon D, Newsom C, Houchins-Juarez N, Jenson A, Wang L, Song Y. Improvement in social deficits in Autism Spectrum Disorders using a theatre-based, peer-mediated intervention. Autism Research. 2014; 7; 1: 4-16. 10.1002/aur.1341. 24150989</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cummins RA, Lau ALD. Community integration or community exposure? A review and discussion in relation to people with an intellectual disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities. 2003; 16; 2: 145-157. 10.1046/j.1468-3148.2003.00157.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cushing P. What counts as a community? Alternative approaches to inclusion and developmental disability. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities. 2015; 61; 2: 83-92. 10.1179/2047386914Z.00000000091</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> D'Eloia MH, Sibthorp J. Relatedness for youth with disabilities: Testing a recreation program model. Journal of Leisure Research. 2014; 46; 4: 462-482. 10.1080/00222216.2014.11950337</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dawson S, McCormick B, Li J. A network analysis of youth with physical disabilities attending a therapeutic camp. Therapeutic Recreation Journal. 2018; 52; 2: 154-169. 10.18666/TRJ-2018-V52-I2-8344</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Deng L. Inclusive museum and its impact on learning of special needs children. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2015; 52; 1: 1-4. 10.1002/pra2.2015.1450520100110</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Deng L. Equity of access to cultural heritage: Museum experience as a facilitator of learning and socialization in children with autism. Curator: The Museum Journal. 2017; 60; 4: 411-426. 10.1111/cura.12219</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Després J-P, Julien-Gauthier F, Jourdan-Ionescu C, Bédard-Bruyère F. The Extra-Ordinary Music Camp: An informal online distance learning approach for children with intellectual and physical disabilities and learning disorders. Frontiers in Education. 2022; 7; August: 1-13. 10.3389/feduc.2022.913390</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Devine MA. "Being a 'Doer' Instead of a 'Viewer'": The role of inclusive leisure contexts in determining social acceptance for people with disabilities. Journal of Leisure Research. 2017; 36; 2: 137-159. 10.1080/00222216.2004.11950017</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Devine MA, Parr MG. "Come on in, but not too Far:" Social capital in an inclusive leisure setting. Leisure Sciences. 2008; 30; 5: 391-408. 10.1080/01490400802353083</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dierking LD, Falk JH, Palmquist S, Crowley K. From teachers to testers: How parents talk to novice and expert children in a natural history museum. Science Education. 2007; 91; 5: 783-804. 10.1002/SCE.20215</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dipeolu A, Cook-Cottone C, Lee GK, Donnelly JP, Janikowski TP, Reynolds AL, Boling T. A concept map of campers' perceptions of camp experience: Implications for the practice of family counseling. The Family Journal. 2016; 24; 2: 182-189. 10.1177/1066480716628566</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Doody KR, Patti AL. Impact of a rural community-based event for families of children with autism spectrum disorders. Rural Special Education Quarterly. 2017; 36; 3: 128-135. 10.1177/8756870517721899</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dunst CJ. Everyday learning opportunities of young children with and without developmental disabilities or delays. International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education. 2020; 7: 23-41</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eaton CK, LaMotte J, Gutierrez-Colina AM, Kardon P, Blount RL. Changes in socio-emotional and behavioral functioning after attending a camp for children with Tourette syndrome: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2016; 44; 6: 1197-1203. 10.1007/s10802-015-0105-9. 26589437</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eberbach C, Crowley K. From seeing to observing: How parents and children learn to see ccience in a botanical garden. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2017; 26; 4: 608-642. 10.1080/10508406.2017.1308867</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Edwards BM, Smart E, King G, Curran CJ, Kingsnorth S. Performance and visual arts-based programs for children with disabilities: a scoping review focusing on psychosocial outcomes. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2020; 42; 4: 574-585. 10.1080/09638288.2018.1503734. 30451026</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fan L, Shire S, Couture M, Zwaigenbaum L, Thompson-Hodgetts S. The influence of disclosure of an autism diagnosis on peer engagement and interactions for a child with autism in summer camps: a case study. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2022; 44; 16: 4519-4530. 10.1080/09638288.2021.1904012. 33771093</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferguson BR, Shapiro SK. Using a naturalistic sport context to train social skills in children. Child & Family Behavior Therapy. 2016; 38; 1: 47-68. 10.1080/07317107.2016.1135700</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fletcher TS, Blake AB, Shelffo KE. Can sensory gallery guides for children with sensory processing challenges improve their museum experience?. Journal of Museum Education. 2018; 43; 1: 66-77. 10.1080/10598650.2017.1407915</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Flynn RM, Ricker AA, Dolezal C, Kunin M, Mellins CA. Residential summer camp for youth with special needs: A longitudinal approach to investigating differences in social skills. Children and Youth Services Review. 2019; 96: 354-363. 10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.10.036</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Francés, L, Quintero, J, Fernández, A, Ruiz, A, Caules, J, Fillon, G, Hervás, A, & Soler, C. V. (2022). Current state of knowledge on the prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders in childhood according to the DSM-5: A systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA criteria. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 16, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-022-00462-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fulton L, Kinnear D, Jahoda A. Belonging and reciprocity amongst people with intellectual disabilities: A systematic methodological review. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities. 2021; 34; 4: 1008-1025. 10.1111/jar.12881. 33723903</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Giummarra MJ, Randjelovic I, O'Brien L. Interventions for social and community participation for adults with intellectual disability, psychosocial disability or on the autism spectrum: An umbrella systematic review. Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences. 2022; 3: 935473. 10.3389/fresc.2022.935473. 36189003. 9397886</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Griswold M, Hegarty CB, Harrist C, Trauntvein N, Griswold D. Exploring the social impacts of a summer camp for youth with Tourette syndrome. Research in Outdoor Education. 2014; 12; 1: 15-35. 10.1353/roe.2014.0002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guest L, Balogh R, Dogra S, Lloyd M. Examining the impact of a multi-sport camp for girls ages 8–11 with autism spectrum disorder. Therapeutic Recreation Journal. 2017; 51; 2: 109-126. 10.18666/TRJ-2017-V51-I2-7383</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hartman, A. (2019). Museum as a space for therapeutic art experiences for adolescents with high functioning autism (HFA) [Doctoral Dissertation, Florida State University]. ProQuest Information & Learning.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hartman A, Owings P. Sculpting expression: A creative arts therapy exhibition. American Behavioral Scientist. 2021; 65; 13: 1879-1892. 10.1177/00027642211003154</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Herring C, Millager RA, Yaruss JS. Outcomes following participation in a support-based summer camp for children who stutter. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools. 2022; 53: 17-29. 10.1044/2021_LSHSS-21-00034. 34662219</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hume K, Steinbrenner JR, Odom SL, Morin KL, Nowell SW, Tomaszewski B, Szendrey S, McIntyre NS, Yücesoy-Özkan S, Savage MN. Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with autism: Third Generation Review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2021; 51: 4013-4032. 10.1007/s10803-020-04844-2. 33449225. 8510990</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jia M, Jiang Y, Mikami AY. Positively biased self-perceptions in children with ADHD: Unique predictor of future maladjustment. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2016; 44; 3: 575-586. 10.1007/s10802-015-0056-1. 26206117</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kaboski JR, Diehl JJ, Beriont J, Crowell CR, Villano M, Wier K, Tang K. Brief Report: A pilot summer robotics camp to reduce social anxiety and improve social/vocational skills in adolescents with ASD. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2015; 45; 12: 3862-3869. 10.1007/s10803-014-2153-3. 24898910</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kampmann J, Bowne M. Utilizing the Sanford harmony program for children on the autism spectrum. Journal of School Counseling. 2020; 18: 15</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Koegel LK, Glugatch LB, Koegel RL, Castellon FA. Targeting IEP social goals for children with autism in an inclusive summer camp. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2019; 49; 6: 2426-2436. 10.1007/s10803-019-03992-4. 30927180. 6548680</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kong, M, Pritchard, M, Dean, L, Talley, M, Torbert, R, & Maha, J. (2017). A community-based sensory training program leads to improved experience at a local zoo for children with sensory challenges. Frontiers in Pediatrics, 5.https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2017.00193</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Koudys J, Perry A, McFee K. Picture Exchange Communication System® (PECS®) use in a community setting: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities. 2022; 34; 5: 829-852. 10.1007/s10882-021-09826-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kulik TK, Fletcher TS. Considering the museum experience of children with autism. Curator: The Museum Journal. 2016; 59; 1: 27-38. 10.1111/cura.12143</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lang R, Muharib R, Lessner P, Davenport K, Ledbetter-Cho K, Rispoli M. Increasing play and decreasing stereotypy for children with autism on a playground. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders. 2020; 4: 146-154. 10.1007/s41252-020-00150-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Langa LA, Monaco P, Subramaniam M, Jaeger PT, Shanahan K, Ziebarth B. Improving the museum experiences of children with autism spectrum disorders and their families: An exploratory examination of their motivations and needs and using web-based resources to meet them. Curator: The Museum Journal. 2013; 56; 3: 323-335. 10.1111/cura.12031</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee GK, Infranco M, Dipeolu A, Cook-Cottone C, Donnelly JP, Janikowski TP, Reynolds A, Boling T. Concept mapping analysis of social skills camp experience for children with disabilities. Children Australia. 2016; 41; 1: 16-28. 10.1017/CHA.2015.41</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liljenquist K, Coster W, Kramer J, Rossetti Z. Feasibility of the Participatory Experience Survey and the Setting Affordances Survey for use in evaluation of programmes serving youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Child: Care, Health and Development. 2017; 43; 4: 511-517. 10.1111/cch.12402. 27634139</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Litchke L, Hutson P. Social-emotional effects of one session of drumtastic ability beats for campers with cognitive development disorders. Palaestra. 2021; 35; 2: 24-32</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lussenhop A, Mesiti LA, Cohn ES, Orsmond GI, Goss J, Reich C, Osipow A, Pirri K, Lindgren-Streicher A. Social participation of families with children with autism spectrum disorder in a science museum. Museums & Social Issues. 2016; 11; 2: 122-137. 10.1080/15596893.2016.1214806</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maich K, Hall CL, Van Rhijn TM, Quinlan L. Developing social skills of summer campers with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A case study of Camps on TRACKS implementation in an inclusive day-camp setting. Exceptionality Education International. 2015; 25; 2: 27-41. 10.5206/eei.v25i2.7722</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marcus M, Haden CA, Uttal DH. Promoting children's learning and transfer across informal science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning experiences. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2018; 175: 80-95. 10.1016/J.JECP.2018.06.003. 30025257</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McVilly KR, Stancliffe RJ, Parmenter TR, Burton-Smith RM. Self-advocates have the last say on friendship†. Disability & Society. 2006; 21; 7: 693-708. 10.1080/09687590600995287</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Merrells J, Buchanan A, Waters R. The experience of social inclusion for people with intellectual disability within community recreational programs: A systematic review. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability. 2018; 43; 4: 381-391. 10.3109/13668250.2017.1283684</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Merrells J, Buchanan A, Waters R. "We feel left out": Experiences of social inclusion from the perspective of young adults with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability. 2019; 44; 1: 13-22. 10.3109/13668250.2017.1310822</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Michalski JH, Mishna F, Worthington C, Cummings R. A multi-method impact evaluation of a therapeutic summer camp program. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal. 2003; 20: 53-76. 10.1023/A:1021467503588</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mitchell ES, Mrug S, Patterson CS, Bailey KJ, Bart Hodgens J. Summer treatment program improves behavior of children with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2015; 45; 8: 2295-2310. 10.1007/s10803-014-2241-4. 25503679</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mulligan S, Rais P, Steele-Driscoll J, Townsend S. Examination of a museum program for children with autism. Journal of Museum Education. 2013; 38; 3 PG-308–319: 308-319. 10.1080/10598650.2013.11510783</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Na JJ, Mikami AY. Pre-existing perceptions of ADHD predict children's sociometrics given to classmates with ADHD. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2018; 27; 10: 3218-3231. 10.1007/s10826-018-1147-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Autism Center. (2015). Findings and conclusions: National standards project, phase 2. <ulink href="http://www.autismdiagnostics.com/assets/Resources/NSP2.pdf">http://www.autismdiagnostics.com/assets/Resources/NSP2.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Neprily Ki, Climie E. Happy Campers: Enhancing social competence in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder at summer camp. Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership. 2023; 15; 2: 1-15. 10.18666/JOREL-2022-11350</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Poria, Y, Reichel, A, & Brandt, Y. (2009). People with disabilities visit art museums: an exploratory study of obstacles and difficulties. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 4(2), 117–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/17438730802366508</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Portes A. Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology. 1998; 24: 1-24. 10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Quinn C, Nowosielski A, Kitchen T, Belfiore PJ. The role of program consistency in a summer therapeutic camp for students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Education and Learning. 2014; 3; 3: 95-107. 10.5539/jel.v3n3p95</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rapp WH. Inquiry-based environments for the inclusion of students with exceptional learning needs. Remedial and Special Education. 2005; 26; 5: 297-310. 10.1177/07419325050260050401</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reich, C, Price, J, Rubin, E, & Steiner, M. A. (2010). Inclusion, disabilities, and informal science learning. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report. Washington, D. C; Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE). https://informalscience.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/InclusionDisabilitiesandInformalScienceEducation.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogoff B, Callanan M, Gutiérrez KD, Erickson F. The organization of informal learning. Review of Research in Education. 2016; 40; 1: 356-401. 10.3102/0091732X16680994</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ryuh Y, Choi P, Oh J, Chen C-C, Lee Y. Impact of inclusive soccer program on psychosocial development of children with and without intellectual disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities. 2019; 31; 5: 691-705. 10.1007/s10882-019-09670-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Santiago Perez T, Crowe B. Community participation for transition- aged youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A systematic review. Therapeutic Recreation Journal. 2021; 55; 1: 19-41. 10.18666/TRJ-2021-V55-I1-10296</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schwartzberg ET, Silverman MJ. Effects of music-based social stories on comprehension and generalization of social skills in children with autism spectrum disorders: A randomized effectiveness study. The Arts in Psychotherapy. 2013; 40; 3: 331-337. 10.1016/j.aip.2013.06.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shields N, King M, Corbett M, Imms C. Is participation among children with intellectual disabilities in outside school activities similar to their typically developing peers? A systematic review. Developmental Neurorehabilitation. 2014; 17; 1: 64-71. 10.3109/17518423.2013.836256. 24087974</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shields N, Synnot A, Kearns C. The extent, context and experience of participation in out-of-school activities among children with disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2015. 10.1016/j.ridd.2015.09.007. 26741263</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Simplican SC, Leader G, Kosciulek J, Leahy M. Defining social inclusion of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: An ecological model of social networks and community participation. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2015; 38: 18-29. 10.1016/j.ridd.2014.10.008. 25543997</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Simpson J, Yantzi N, Shute T, Watson S. 'Even if it's flawed it's still beautiful': life lessons learned by adolescents with neurological conditions at summer camp. Disability & Society. 2021; PG-: 1-24. 10.1080/09687599.2021.1994372</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Siperstein GN, Glick GC, Parker RC. Social inclusion of children with intellectual disabilities in a recreational setting. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. 2009; 47; 2: 97-107. 10.1352/1934-9556-47.2.97. 19368488</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sobel, D. M, & Jipson, J. L. (Eds.). (2016). Cognitive development in museum settings: Relating research and practice. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Solish, A, Perry, A, & Minnes, P. (2010). Participation of children with and without disabilities in social, recreational and leisure activities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.2009.00525.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spencer J, Maynard S. Teacher education in informal settings. Journal of Museum Education. 2014; 39; 1: 54-66. 10.1080/10598650.2014.11510795</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sreckovic MA, Kenney CK, Wallace M. Autism training for law enforcement officers: A scoping review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2023; 53; 10: 3835-3846. 10.1007/S10803-022-05692-Y. 35925431</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Taheri A, Perry A, Minnes P. Exploring factors that impact activity participation of children and adolescents with severe developmental disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 2017; 61; 12: 1151-1161. 10.1111/jir.12437. 29154492</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Taylor EK, Kervin L. Parent/caregiver perspectives on children's play and learning at a children's museum: A qualitative descriptive study. Journal of Museum Education. 2022; 47; 2: 275-285. 10.1080/10598650.2021.2023312</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thompson-Hodgetts S, McKillop A, Couture M, Shire S, Weiss JA, Zwaigenbaum L. Influence of a brief autism education intervention on peer engagement and inclusion at mainstream day camps: A mixed-methods pilot study. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2023. 10.1007/s10803-023-06024-4. 37314666</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tint A, Maughan AL, Weiss JA. Community participation of youth with intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 2017; 61; 2: 168-180. 10.1111/JIR.12311. 27492816</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tobin MC, Drager KDR, Richardson LF. A systematic review of social participation for adults with autism spectrum disorders: Support, social functioning, and quality of life. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders. 2014; 8; 3: 214-229. 10.1016/j.rasd.2013.12.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> UN General Assembly. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. https://<ulink href="http://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/crpd/pages/conventionrightspersonswithdisabilities.aspx">www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/crpd/pages/conventionrightspersonswithdisabilities.aspx</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vadeboncoeur, J. A. (2006). Engaging young people: Learning in informal contexts. Review of Research in Education, 30, 239–278. <ulink href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/4129774">http://www.jstor.org/stable/4129774</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Verdonschot MMLL, De Witte LP, Reichrath E, Buntinx WHEE, Curfs LMGG. Community participation of people with an intellectual disability: A review of empirical findings. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 2009; 53; 4: 303-318. 10.1111/J.1365-2788.2008.01144.X. 19087215</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walker AN, Barry TD, Bader SH. Therapist and parent ratings of changes in adaptive social skills following a summer treatment camp for children with autism spectrum disorders: A preliminary study. Child & Youth Care Forum. 2010; 39; 5: 305-322. 10.1007/s10566-010-9110-x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Willemin T, Litchke LG, Liu T, Ekins C. Social emotional effects of Drumtastic®: A dyadic within-group drumming pilot program for children with autism spectrum disorder. International Journal of Special Education. 2018; 33; 1: 94-103</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> World Health Organization. (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health(ICF). https://<ulink href="http://www.who.int/standards/classifications/international-classification-of-functioning-disability-and-health">www.who.int/standards/classifications/international-classification-of-functioning-disability-and-health</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yinger OS, Vasil M, Robinson AS, Jaspersen M, Eisenbaum E, Mullis LC. Universal design for learning in a music camp: Perspectives and musical self-efficacy of children with disabilities. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education. 2023; 42; 1: 33-42. 10.1177/87551233221118905</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zhao WM, Thirumal K, Renwick R, DuBois D. Belonging through sport participation for young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A scoping review. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities. 2021; 34; 2: 402-420. 10.1111/jar.12817. 33086436</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zwicker JG, Rehal H, Sodhi S, Karkling M, Paul A, Hilliard M, Jarus T. Effectiveness of a summer camp intervention for children with developmental coordination disorder. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics. 2015; 35; 2: 163-177. 10.3109/01942638.2014.957431</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Julia M. Ranieri; Nicole Neil; Monica Sadowski and Mohammad Azzam</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib96" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib99" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib94" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib83" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib102" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib92" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib84" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib101" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib106" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib89" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib88" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib97" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib82" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib93" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib100" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib103" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib108" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib85" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib77" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib90" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib104" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref109"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib109" firstref="ref112"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref114"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib107" firstref="ref117"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref119"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib91" firstref="ref122"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref124"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref125"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref126"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl76" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref127"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl77" bibid="bib98" firstref="ref128"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl78" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref129"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl79" bibid="bib80" firstref="ref130"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl80" bibid="bib86" firstref="ref131"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl81" bibid="bib105" firstref="ref132"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl82" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref133"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl83" bibid="bib81" firstref="ref141"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl84" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref144"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl85" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref145"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl86" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref155"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl87" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref156"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl88" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref157"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl89" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref161"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl90" bibid="bib79" firstref="ref162"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl91" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref164"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl92" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref180"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl93" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref185"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl94" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref189"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl95" bibid="bib95" firstref="ref190"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl96" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref193"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl97" bibid="bib87" firstref="ref194"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1448025
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Supporting Inclusion in Informal Education Settings for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Scoping Review
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Julia+M%2E+Ranieri%22">Julia M. Ranieri</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Nicole+Neil%22">Nicole Neil</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5906-3880">0000-0001-5906-3880</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Monica+Sadowski%22">Monica Sadowski</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mohammad+Azzam%22">Mohammad Azzam</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Developmental+and+Physical+Disabilities%22"><i>Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities</i></searchLink>. 2024 36(6):955-993.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 39
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Information Analyses
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inclusion%22">Inclusion</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Students+with+Disabilities%22">Students with Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Informal+Education%22">Informal Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Content+Analysis%22">Content Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Participation%22">Student Participation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Neurodevelopmental+Disorders%22">Neurodevelopmental Disorders</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Outcome+Based+Education%22">Outcome Based Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Accessibility+%28for+Disabled%29%22">Accessibility (for Disabled)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Camps%22">Camps</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Competence%22">Interpersonal Competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Positive+Behavior+Supports%22">Positive Behavior Supports</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Caregivers%22">Caregivers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Attitudes%22">Student Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Special+Programs%22">Special Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Caregiver+Attitudes%22">Caregiver Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Positive+Attitudes%22">Positive Attitudes</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s10882-024-09970-8
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1056-263X<br />1573-3580
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Children with neurodevelopmental disabilities are among the most vulnerable to experiencing exclusion from community settings. Informal education settings (IES), such as camps, museums, and zoos, provide rich learning opportunities beyond the classroom, yet inclusion efforts have primarily focused on physical accessibility. A review of research is needed to identify practices that support the participation of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities in these settings. We used a scoping review framework to determine what research exists concerning the participation of individuals with neurodevelopmental disabilities in informal education settings, what practices are used to foster participation in informal education settings for children with neurodevelopmental disabilities and what are the outcomes of these practices on participation. Forty-six studies using quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods designs were included, with 24 taking place in inclusive settings or programs. The review found that children with neurodevelopmental disabilities continue to experience barriers to inclusion in informal settings, and there are positive outcomes associated with specialized and therapeutic as well as inclusive camps. Moreover, behavioural supports result in increases in social skills and decreases in interfering behaviour in informal settings and caregivers and children with neurodevelopmental disabilities have positive attitudes toward specialized programming. Encouraging and sustaining a variety of options, including inclusive and specialized programs, is likely to support and enhance inclusion. Future studies on inclusive practices in IES should include measures of the degree and quality of participation, including measures of the subjective experiences of participants.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1448025
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1448025
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s10882-024-09970-8
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 39
        StartPage: 955
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Inclusion
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Students with Disabilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Informal Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Content Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Participation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Neurodevelopmental Disorders
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Outcome Based Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Accessibility (for Disabled)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Camps
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Competence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Positive Behavior Supports
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Caregivers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Special Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Caregiver Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Positive Attitudes
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Supporting Inclusion in Informal Education Settings for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Scoping Review
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Julia M. Ranieri
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Nicole Neil
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Monica Sadowski
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mohammad Azzam
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1056-263X
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1573-3580
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 36
            – Type: issue
              Value: 6
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities
              Type: main
ResultId 1