Design: scoping review following JBI methods and PRISMA-ScR, with lived-experience experts
Population: 134 studies, 151,134 participants recruited as neurodivergent or neurodiverse, searched to August 2025
Primary outcome: clinical diagnoses associated with the terms neurodivergence and neurodiversity
Effect: self-reported diagnosis 41.8%, self-identification 37.3%, no diagnosis specified 21.6%; autism 68.7%, ADHD 64.2%

A scoping review searched four databases to August 2025 and found 134 studies, 151,134 participants, that recruited people described as neurodivergent or neurodiverse. The question was simple: what clinical diagnoses does that label actually stand for?

Mostly none that were verified. Participants were identified by self-reported diagnosis in 41.8 per cent of studies and by self-identification alone in 37.3 per cent; 21.6 per cent specified no clinical diagnosis at all. Where diagnoses were given, autism appeared in 68.7 per cent of studies and ADHD in 64.2 per cent, then dyslexia (32.8 per cent), dyspraxia (15.7 per cent), anxiety disorder (14.9 per cent) and dyscalculia (12.7 per cent). The authors, who worked with experts with lived experience, conclude that the term is valuable for identity and poor for clinical categorisation.

That has a direct consequence at the desk. A referral letter, a school report or a patient's own account describing someone as neurodivergent tells you how they understand themselves — it does not tell you whether anyone has assessed them for autism or ADHD, and it should not be recorded as though it did. Use the precise diagnostic descriptor in the notes; keep the identity term for how you speak with the person.

Treat 'neurodivergent' in a referral as a self-description, not a diagnosis, until assessment says otherwise
Record the specific condition you have assessed — autism, ADHD, specific learning difficulty — in the diagnostic field
Ask directly whether anyone has formally assessed them, and where
Do not let the term close down assessment of a treatable comorbidity such as anxiety
Keep using the person's own language in conversation; the precision is for the record

Why it matters

A word in a referral letter is being read as a diagnosis by clinicians and commissioners who should not be reading it that way.

The statistics, in plain English

The percentages here describe studies, not people: 68.7 per cent means autism was among the diagnoses in that share of the 134 studies, not that 68.7 per cent of participants were autistic. The proportion recruiting on self-identification alone is the figure that matters, because those cohorts cannot be compared with clinically defined ones.