Advancing inclusive research with people with profound and multiple learning disabilities through a sensory-dialogical approach

Exploring participatory health research and its application to speech and language therapy research practices

BACKGROUND

The role of participatory health research (PHR) is increasingly acknowledged by funding bodies, researchers and civil society globally; however, it continues to be under-represented in the speech and language therapy (SLT) research literature. This collaborative research approach is associated with the increased application of research evidence, and the generation of positive impacts in practice, policy, health systems and society.

AIMS

To increase researchers' and other participatory partners' understanding of PHR, and to demonstrate its applicability to research in the SLT field.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

This aim is achieved through a discussion on PHR, its principles, benefits and challenges, and the evaluation of its impact. A recently developed evaluation framework to support the implementation of best engagement practices is examined, and recommendations for how this framework can be used to plan and evaluate engagement in participatory stuttering research is presented.

MAIN CONTRIBUTION

This paper serves as an important conversation on the value of PHR to SLT research, and presents guidance to support its increased implementation in this research field.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

Conclusions & Implications: PHR remains an under-represented research approach in the SLT literature, despite increasing evidence demonstrating its effectiveness and value. It offers a potential solution to the research-practice gap, and challenges the ongoing research hierarchies by democrating the process of knowledge production.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject PHR is increasingly attracting the attention of funders, researchers and decision-makers due to a growing body of evidence in support of this collaborative research approach. Despite its potential to bridge the research-practice gap, PHR remains significantly under-represented in the SLT research literature. What this paper adds to the existing knowledge This paper discusses the principles, benefits, challenges and impact evaluation of PHR. A recently developed evaluation framework for supporting the implementation of best engagement practices is examined. A demonstration of how this framework can be used to plan and evaluate engagement in participatory stuttering research is presented. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Speech and language therapists play a key role in PHR, as co-researchers contributing essential context-based knowledge. It is therefore imperative that they understand the principles and practices of this approach in order to maximize their input in future participatory partnerships.

Adaptive interviewing for the inclusion of people with intellectual disability in qualitative research

BACKGROUND

Historically the voices of people with intellectual disability have been occluded by barriers imposed by research practice. More recently, adaptive research approaches have been proposed to enhance the inclusion of people with intellectual disability in qualitative research.

METHOD

This article presents an adaptive interviewing approach employed with five people ageing with intellectual disabilities in rural South Australia. The interviews were conducted within a broader participatory action research project in which tools and resources were co-designed for post-parental care planning.

RESULTS

We describe our adaptive interviewing approach incorporating multiple methods: (i) responsive communication techniques; (ii) the inclusion and support of family carers; (iii) visual tools; (iv) walking interviews.

CONCLUSION

Findings contribute knowledge about how an adaptive interview approach supports the participation of people with an intellectual disability in qualitative research.

Pushing the boundaries of digital social contact: Experiences of people with disabilities and their social networks during the COVID-19 pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many people with intellectual disabilities living in care facilities could not receive visitors. Health authorities suggested the use of digital social contact as an alternative for in-person visits. We examined how people with intellectual disabilities living in care facilities experienced the use of digital social contact with their informal social network throughout 2020. Residents, their relatives, volunteer visitors, direct support staff, and care facility managers (N = 283) completed an online questionnaire, of whom 35 participated in an interview. Video calling and in-person visits were among the most common forms of staying in touch. Experiences with digital social contact depended on residents' abilities and support needs, and on preconditions, such as staff availability. The first phases of the pandemic led to experiences of possibilities and benefits of using digital social contact as complementary to in-person contact for people with different levels of intellectual disability, also after the pandemic.

Self-reported explanations for self-injury by people with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review of qualitative studies

Background

Emotional distress has received less attention as an explanatory factor for self-injury in people with intellectual disabilities, with research and practice primarily focusing on biobehavioural factors. This systematic review examines the self-reported explanations for self-injury by people with mild or moderate intellectual disabilities, and discusses how the findings contrast with those from self-reported studies of people within the general population who self-harm.

Methods

Five databases (PsychINFO, IBSS, CINAHL, Web of Science and Medline) were systematically searched to find qualitative, empirical research since 2000 about self-reported reasons for self-injury.

Results

Four studies were found which conducted research with people with intellectual disabilities. Three primary themes are discussed: relief from overwhelming emotions; trauma and loss; and difficulty in articulating emotions.

Conclusion

This review found a paucity of research asking people with intellectual disabilities about their own self-injury. However, the research available suggests that explanatory factors for self-injury typically reported in the general population should be considered for those with mild or moderate intellectual disabilities.