Differentiating care for persons with mild intellectual disability or borderline intellectual functioning: a Delphi study on the opinions of primary and professional caregivers and scientists

Sexual support and education for adults with mild intellectual disabilities: a Delphi study on multiple perspectives

BACKGROUND

Providing appropriate sexual support and education for adults with mild intellectual disabilities (IDs) is a source of considerable debate, resulting in diverse, non-funded and potentially adverse practices. This study aims to identify a consensus among experts regarding what conditions are conducive to successful sexual support and education for adults with mild IDs.

METHODS

A Delphi study was conducted with 13 experts, including experts-by-experience, relatives, support staff, psychologists and sexologists. Qualitative data on the conditions for sexual support and education were gathered in the first round and thematically analysed. In the following three quantitative rounds, consensus was achieved using Likert-type response scales and participants' feedback.

RESULTS

Round 1 resulted in 82 conditions on six themes: 'the necessary attitude', 'requirements', 'approach to delivering sexual support and education', 'appropriate providers', 'settings and timing' and 'effective collaboration with the network'. In the following three quantitative rounds, the experts reached consensus on 68 conditions distributed across the six themes.

CONCLUSIONS

The six themes highlight conducive conditions for successful sexual support and education for adults with mild IDs, emphasising the significance of a safe and supportive environment, comprehensive educational programmes, and the promotion of autonomy and protection. The consensus-based findings have distinct implications for practice and future research.

The role of people with intellectual disability in intellectual disability research: A systematic review of Delphi studies

BACKGROUND

The way intellectual disability research is designed warrants critical examination, as the knowledge produced through these approaches informs evidence-based practices. People with lived experience should be considered experts in relation to understanding their bodies, conditions, and treatment.

METHOD

This systematic review analyses the design of Delphi studies, to determine the extent to which people with intellectual disability are involved as experts. The design of Delphi studies (involving structured feedback from experts) provides an insight into the extent that 'lived experience' is valued as a source of expert knowledge.

RESULTS

Fifty-five publications reporting on forty-nine separate Delphi studies met our inclusion criteria. Nine publications report the involvement of people with intellectual disability. However, family/informal caregivers are represented as experts in higher numbers and their voices carry greater weight.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this review include guidance for practitioners and researchers to facilitate greater participatory roles of people with intellectual disability.

Self-Report Stress Measures to Assess Stress in Adults With Mild Intellectual Disabilities-A Scoping Review

Stress has a major negative impact on the development of psychopathology and contributes to the onset of adverse physical conditions. Timely recognition and monitoring of stress-related problems are therefore important, especially in client populations that are more vulnerable to stress, such as people with mild intellectual disabilities (MID). Recent research on the use of physiological measures to assess stress levels emphasize that, in addition to these measures, self-report instruments are necessary to gain insight into the individual perception and impact of stress on daily life. However, there is no current overview of self-report stress measures that focus on the experience of stress in the present moment or in daily life. To provide an overview of the existing self-report stress measures for clinicians and researchers, a scoping review was conducted. In addition, to advise clinical professionals on the use of self-report measures of stress for people with MID, the results of an expert consultation were used to refine the preliminary findings. A systematic scoping literature search resulted in a total of 13 self-reported stress measures that met the final inclusion criteria, of which three were developed specifically for assessing stress in adults with MID (GAS-ID, LI, and SAS-ID). For each included self-report stress measure, the psychometric quality, assessment procedure, and suitability for adults with MID were reported. These were supplemented by the findings from the expert consultation. Implications for clinical practice on the use of self-report stress measures, particularly for people with MID, are discussed. Recommendations for future research and development are given.