Qualitative methodological approaches involving participants with intellectual disabilities: Scoping review of literature exploring death and dying

BACKGROUND

A paucity of qualitative research on sensitive topics that focuses on participants with intellectual disabilities leaves their views unexplored. This scoping review mainly aimed to provide an overview of qualitative data collection methods used in research involving participants with intellectual disabilities to explore death and dying.

METHOD

A scoping review of primary research and methodological papers published between January 2008 and March 2022 was conducted. The PRISMA-ScR checklist was followed.

RESULTS

We identified 25 articles utilising four data collection methods: interviews, focus groups, the Nominal Group Technique, and participant observation. Data collection trends were identified, including accommodations for participants with intellectual disabilities, visual media used as a facilitator, and reporting of distress protocols. Most participants had mild to moderate intellectual disabilities.

CONCLUSIONS

The included studies demonstrate a flexible approach that relies on the use of multiple methods. Future research must adequately report study characteristics to ensure transparency and reliability.

Eligibility criteria in NIH-funded clinical trials: Can adults with intellectual disability get in?

BACKGROUND

Although scientific breakthroughs can promote health equity, there is concern that adults with intellectual disability, a health disparities population, may be excluded from clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the extent to which adults with intellectual disability are subject to exclusion from National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded clinical trials.

METHODS

We studied recent NIH-funded Phase 2/3, 3, and 4 clinical trials of United States-based working-age adults (>18 < 55 years of age) listed in ClinicalTrials.gov. We coded eligibility criteria for inclusion, direct exclusion, and indirect exclusion of adults with intellectual disability.

RESULTS

We rarely identified studies that directly include adults with intellectual disability. Most studies (74.6%) had eligibility criteria that directly and/or indirectly exclude adults with intellectual disability. Approximately one-third of studies had direct exclusion criteria based on cognitive impairment or diagnosis of intellectual disability. Nearly 65% of studies indirectly excluded adults with intellectual disability based on factors likely associated with intellectual disability (e.g., functional capacity, inability to read/write, and/or research staff discretion).

CONCLUSIONS

We found less exclusion based on diagnosis of intellectual disability than anticipated. Nonetheless, about three-fourths of studies had eligibility criteria which would likely lead to the direct and/or indirect exclusion of adults with intellectual disability. Our findings suggest substantial cause for concern that adults with intellectual disability experience widespread exclusion from NIH-funded clinical trials-exclusion that may lack appropriate justification and assessment. Consequently, this group is denied equal access to the potential benefits of scientific discovery. We provide recommendations for approaches to include adults with intellectual disability.

Health and Access to Health Services for People with Disability in Australia: Data and Data Gaps

The right of people with disability to enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health without discrimination on the basis of disability is enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). Among its obligations as a signatory to the CRPD, Australia is required to collect appropriate information, including statistical and research data, to inform development and implementation of policies to give effect to the Convention. In this commentary, we first describe how the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) conceptual model of disability can be operationalised in statistical data collections, with a focus on how this is achieved in key Australian data sources such that people with disability can be identified as a population group. We then review existing statistical data on health and health service use for people with disability in Australia, highlighting data gaps and limitations. Finally, we outline priorities and considerations for improving data on health and access to health services for people with disability. As well as conceptual, practical, and ethical considerations, a key principle that must guide future disability data development is that people with disability and their representative organisations must be involved and participate fully in the development of disability data and statistics, and in their use.

Aging with Down Syndrome-Where Are We Now and Where Are We Going?

Down syndrome (DS) is a form of accelerated aging, and people with DS are highly prone to aging-related conditions that include vascular and neurological disorders. Due to the overexpression of several genes on Chromosome 21, for example genes encoding amyloid precursor protein (APP), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and some of the interferon receptors, those with DS exhibit significant accumulation of amyloid, phospho-tau, oxidative stress, neuronal loss, and neuroinflammation in the brain as they age. In this review, we will summarize the major strides in this research field that have been made in the last few decades, as well as discuss where we are now, and which research areas are considered essential for the field in the future. We examine the scientific history of DS bridging these milestones in research to current efforts in the field. We extrapolate on comorbidities associated with this phenotype and highlight clinical networks in the USA and Europe pursuing clinical research, concluding with funding efforts and recent recommendations to the NIH regarding DS research.

A survey study of the attitudes and experiences of adults with intellectual disability regarding participation in research

BACKGROUND

Historically, people with intellectual disability have been exploited in and excluded from scientific research. To facilitate greater representation of adults with intellectual disability as research respondents, we sought to understand their interest in research participation and factors affecting their willingness to volunteer to participate, such as the core value of trust.

METHODS

Our survey measured attitudes of adults with intellectual disability towards research in general and research specifically involving adults with intellectual disability as respondents, as well as their prior research experiences, trust of researchers and interest in future research participation.

RESULTS

Participants reported positive attitudes towards research and strong interest in future participation opportunities, and trust of researchers was positively correlated to both. The belief that 'research about adults with intellectual disability is very important' also predicted participants' interest in future research participation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that adults with intellectual disability support the direct involvement of adults with intellectual disability in research as respondents. Trustworthy rapport with researchers and positive views about research foster greater inclusion of this population.

Perceptions and understandings of self-determination in the context of relationships between people with intellectual disabilities and social care professionals

This study examines perceptions and understandings of self-determination in the context of relationships between people with intellectual disabilities and social care professionals. We held focus group discussions to explore the views and experiences of 10 residents and 10 professionals at three facilities for people with intellectual disabilities located in Western Switzerland. Participants perceived and understood self-determination in terms of decision-making, social skills, procedures, identity, self-consciousness, autonomy, freedom, barriers, and facilitators. The research process highlighted the shifting and situational nature of the concept, as well as the importance of self-determination for people with intellectual disabilities. The findings also highlight the importance of discussion and reflection on the concept of self-determination and its benefits for people with intellectual disabilities.

A quantitative study of attitudes toward the research participation of adults with intellectual disability: Do stakeholders agree?

BACKGROUND

Attitudes toward the research participation of adults with intellectual disability inform research policy and practice, impact interest in and support for research participation, and promote or discourage the generation of new knowledge to promote health among adults with intellectual disability. Yet we know little about these beliefs among the public and the scientific community.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

We quantitatively studied attitudes among adults with intellectual disability, family and friends, disability service providers, researchers, and Institutional Review Board (IRB) members. We predicted that adults with intellectual disability, and researchers would espouse views most consistent with disability rights, whereas IRB members, and to a lesser degree family, friends, and service providers, would espouse more protective views.

METHODS

We surveyed five hundred and twelve members of the five participant stakeholder groups on their attitudes toward the research participation of adults with intellectual disability.

RESULTS

We found broad support for research about people with intellectual disability, though slightly more tempered support for their direct participation therein. In general, IRB members and to some extent adults with intellectual disability endorsed direct participation less than others. We also found that adults with intellectual disability strongly believed in their consent capacity.

CONCLUSIONS

Resources should be directed toward health-related research with adults with intellectual disability, and interventions should be pursued to address ethical challenges and promote beliefs consistent with human rights.

What's the Harm? Harms in Research With Adults With Intellectual Disability

Scientific advances can improve the lives of adults with intellectual disability, yet concerns that research participation may impose harm impede scientific progress. What counts as harmful can be subjective and perceptions of harm may vary among stakeholders. We studied perspectives on the harmfulness of research events among adults with intellectual disability, family members and friends, disability service providers, researchers, and Institutional Review Board members. We found considerable variance. For example, adults with intellectual disability see exclusion from research as more harmful, but most psychosocial harms as less significant than others. All stakeholders agree that having someone else make the participation decision is harmful. Findings provide insights into the concept of harm and ethical research with adults with intellectual disability.

Is It Worth It? Benefits in Research With Adults With Intellectual Disability

Including adults with intellectual disability in research promotes direct benefits to participants and larger societal benefits. Stakeholders may have different views of what count as benefits and their importance. We compared views on benefits in research with adults with intellectual disability among adults with intellectual disability, family and friends, service providers, researchers, and institutional review board members. We found that adults with intellectual disability value direct and indirect research benefits, and want to participate in research that offers them. Other stakeholders generally see less value in direct benefits and predict more tempered interest in research participation as compared to adults with intellectual disability. To promote respectful research participation, research policy and practice should incorporate the views of adults with intellectual disability.

Is Safety in the Eye of the Beholder? Safeguards in Research With Adults With Intellectual Disability

Human subjects research has a core commitment to participant well-being. This obligation is accentuated for once exploited populations such as adults with intellectual disability. Yet we know little about the public's views on appropriate safeguards for this population. We surveyed adults with intellectual disability, family members and friends, disability service providers, researchers, and Institutional Review Board (IRB) members to compare views on safeguards. We found many points of convergence of views, particularly for decision-making and participation. One trend is that adults with intellectual disability perceive greater safety in being engaged directly in recruitment, and recruitment by specific individuals. Researchers and IRB members need to consider community views to facilitate the safe and respectful inclusion of adults with intellectual disability.

"You can't be cold and scientific": community views on ethical issues in intellectual disability research

Perceptions, attitudes, and ethical concerns related to conducting research with adults with intellectual disability hinder scientific innovation to promote health. Yet we lack an understanding of community views on effective research policy and practice. To address this knowledge void, we qualitatively studied the views of adults with intellectual disability and those who provide them support regarding research participation of adults with intellectual disability. We found substantial support for their inclusion, particularly given the possibility of benefits to adults with intellectual disability, researchers, and society. We also found concerns for potential harm and differing ideas on how to promote safety. Our findings emphasize the importance of their inclusion in research, and the need for policies and practices that promote respect and safety.

Paradigm shifts in disability and health: toward more ethical public health research

Disability is often considered a health outcome disproportionately experienced by minority groups. It is also possible to view people with disabilities as a minority group that itself experiences health disparities. Calls to reduce these disparities necessitate the inclusion of people with developmental disabilities in research, although resulting ethical issues can thwart scientific progress. Using disability rights principles can help address ethical challenges and promote safe, respectful public health research. Examples include applying human rights frameworks, providing accommodations, attending to power, countering legacies of deficits-based models of disability, and transforming access to science more broadly. Collectively, these strategies can encourage broader engagement in safe, respectful, inclusive public health research aimed at promoting the health and well-being of people with developmental disabilities.

'You need to let your voice be heard': research participants' views on research

BACKGROUND

Persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities have had regrettably few opportunities to voice their opinions on aspects of research with which they have had direct experience. Understanding and responding to these views can contribute to policies and practices that increasingly treat people as they desire to be treated.

METHODS

We conducted individual interviews and focus groups with 16 adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities to examine their perspectives on participating in research.

RESULTS

Our analysis indicates that adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities want to engage in research to improve their quality of life and to have greater access to a worthwhile activity through more active participation. Our results also highlight trust as a critical ingredient in the success of research with this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that despite ethical challenges, researchers can and should pursue research that has the potential to improve the lives of persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Such research is more likely to be both ethical and successful if researchers pay attention to enhancing autonomy and person-centredness, while at the same time engendering participant trust.

Attitudes of Pakistani community members and staff toward people with intellectual disability

The acceptance and inclusion of persons with intellectual disability can vary across cultures, and understanding attitudes can provide insight into such variation. To our knowledge, no previous study has explored attitudes toward people with intellectual disability among Pakistani community members and disability service providers. We administered the Community Living Attitudes Scale (Henry et al., 1996), a measure of attitudes toward people with intellectual disability developed in the United States, to 262 community members and 190 disability service providers in Pakistan. Confirmatory factor analysis found a 4-factor solution (empowerment, similarity, exclusion, and sheltering) fit the Pakistani sample. More positive attitudes were observed in staff serving people with intellectual disability, females, Christians, Hindus, Sunnis, and people with greater education. We discuss implications for research, theory, and practice.

"We want respect": adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities address respect in research

Respect is central to ethical guidelines for research. The scientific community has long debated, and at times disagreed on, how to demonstrate respect in research with adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. To illuminate the voices of those most affected, the author studies the views of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities on respect in research. Findings are consistent with disability rights' ideas and indicate that adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities have much to contribute to the discussion, that they value participating, and that they agree with calls to focus on human rights and dignity. Notably, participants spoke at lengths about the nature of interactions between researchers and participants. Implications are discussed, including how to infuse research standards with community-supported values and preferences.

Exploring the perceptions of self-determination of individuals with intellectual disability

Interviews were conducted with 17 individuals who had intellectual disability to expand our understanding of the impact of self-determination in their life. Themes emerging from the interviews were grouped into three categories: meaning of self-determination, learning about self-determination, and dreams for the future. Participants described self-determination as being able to make choices and be in control of one's life and setting as well as being able to work toward goals and engage in advocacy. Participants discussed the importance of supports for expressing self-determination and identified environmental characteristics that promoted and inhibited self-determination. Overall, their perceptions confirm the importance of promoting personal development of skills and attitudes associated with self-determination and systems change to create environmental opportunities for self-determination and causal agency. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.