Explore the vast range of titles available.

The American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD) has published terminology and classification manuals since 1921. Their goals over the last 100 years have been consistent: To fulfill the Association's continued responsibility to be the primary repository of intellectual disability-related research and best practices; to publish a scientific definition of intellectual disability (ID) and its assumptions based on research and one that provides a long, stable definitional history; to provide a singular focus on ID and the lives of people with ID and their families; and to communicate professional standards, ethics, and best practices regarding diagnosis, classification, and planning supports. Consistent with these historical goals, the goals of the 12th edition of the AAIDD manual (Schalock et al. 2021) are to: (a) integrate material published in the 11th edition (Schalock et al., 2010) of the AAIDD manual with post-2010 developments and historical markers; (b) develop a user-friendly manual that combines the theoretical and conceptual thoroughness of a manual with the practical aspects of a user's guide; (c) describe a systematic approach to the diagnosis, optional subgroup classification, and planning of supports for people with intellectual disability based on conceptual models, a clear rationale and purpose, and evidence-based practices; (d) combine current empirical knowledge and best practices into an integrative approach to intellectual disability; and (e) provide practice guidelines that frame best practices, increase understanding, and facilitate precise, valid, and effective decisions, recommendations, and actions. The content of the 12th edition reflects the transformation that is occurring in the field of ID. This transformation, which is occurring to various degrees internationally, is characterized by using precise terminology, incorporating a functional and holistic approach to ID, embracing the supports model and evidence-based practices, implementing outcome evaluation, empowering individuals and families, understanding better the multidimensional properties of context, and incorporating an explicit notion of professional responsibility (Schalock et al., in press). As a result of this transformation, the manual contains both modifications of previous concepts and terminology, and the addition of new terms and concepts. These modifications and additions are reflected in the definition of intellectual disability, the evidence-based approach to diagnosis and optional postdiagnosis subgroup classification, the operationalization of systems of supports, and the incorporation of an integrative approach to ID. Throughout the manual, human functioning is viewed from a systems perspective towards understanding human functioning, which includes human functioning dimensions, interactive systems of supports, and human functioning outcomes.

Objectives. To describe mortality among adults with intellectual disability in England in comparison with the general population. Methods. We conducted a cohort study from 2009 to 2013 using data from 343 general practices. Adults with intellectual disability (n = 16 666; 656 deaths) were compared with age-, gender-, and practice-matched controls (n = 113 562; 1358 deaths). Results. Adults with intellectual disability had higher mortality rates than controls (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.3, 3.9). This risk remained high after adjustment for comorbidity, smoking, and deprivation (HR = 3.1; 95% CI = 2.7, 3.4); it was even higher among adults with intellectual disability and Down syndrome or epilepsy. A total of 37.0% of all deaths among adults with intellectual disability were classified as being amenable to health care intervention, compared with 22.5% in the general population (HR = 5.9; 95% CI = 5.1, 6.8). Conclusions. Mortality among adults with intellectual disability is markedly elevated in comparison with the general population, with more than a third of deaths potentially amenable to health care interventions. This mortality disparity suggests the need to improve access to, and quality of, health care among people with intellectual disability.

Antiseizure medications (ASMs) are the second most widely prescribed psychotropic for people with intellectual disabilities in England. Multiple psychotropic prescribing is prevalent in almost half of people with intellectual disabilities on ASMs. This analysis identifies limited evidence of ASM benefit in challenging behaviour management and suggests improvements needed to inform clinical practice.

The prescribing of psychotropic medications for people with an intellectual disability has changed. In many locations across England, antidepressants have become the most widely prescribed psychotropic. In the context of the current NHS England STOMP programme to reduce inappropriate psychotropic prescribing for people with intellectual disability, there is an urgent need to understand whether this change reflects evidence-based use of the medications involved. There has been little analysis into the benefits or problems associated with the change and whether it is of concern. This paper offers a variety of possible explanations and opportunities to improve clinical practice and policy.

Diagnostic overshadowing is a bias in which symptoms of a psychological disorder are falsely attributed to a known diagnosis of intellectual disability. This systematic review evaluated all research on diagnostic overshadowing conducted to date, including dissertations and peer-reviewed journal articles. In total, 25 studies were included in this review. Findings suggest diagnostic overshadowing may not be as ubiquitous as originally believed, with one third of included studies finding no overshadowing. The quality of the evidence was graded as “Low” using the LEGEND tool, with common issues including outdated studies, analogue methodologies, small sample sizes and convenience samples, and inappropriate conducting or reporting of statistical analyses. Implications for the field and recommendations for future research are discussed.

The draft Mental Health Bill, which amends the Mental Health Act 1983 for England and Wales, proposes protections for people with intellectual disability and/or autism (ID/A) to prevent detention in hospital in the absence of mental illness. This editorial critically appraises the positive impact and unintended consequences of the proposed reforms for people with ID/A.

The use of eHealth is more challenging for people with intellectual disabilities (IDs) than for the general population because the technologies often do not fit the complex needs and living circumstances of people with IDs. A translational gap exists between the developed technology and users' needs and capabilities. User involvement approaches have been developed to overcome this mismatch during the design, development, and implementation processes of the technology. The effectiveness and use of eHealth have received much scholarly attention, but little is known about user involvement approaches. In this scoping review, we aimed to identify the inclusive approaches currently used for the design, development, and implementation of eHealth for people with IDs. We reviewed how and in what phases people with IDs and other stakeholders were included in these processes. We used 9 domains identified from the Centre for eHealth Research and Disease management road map and the Nonadoption, Abandonment, and challenges to the Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability framework to gain insight into these processes. We identified both scientific and gray literature through systematic searches in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and (websites of) relevant intermediate (health care) organizations. We included studies published since 1995 that showed the design, development, or implementation processes of eHealth for people with IDs. Data were analyzed along 9 domains: participatory development, iterative process, value specification, value proposition, technological development and design, organization, external context, implementation, and evaluation. The search strategy resulted in 10,639 studies, of which 17 (0.16%) met the inclusion criteria. Various approaches were used to guide user involvement (eg, human or user-centered design and participatory development), most of which applied an iterative process mainly during technological development. The involvement of stakeholders other than end users was described in less detail. The literature focused on the application of eHealth at an individual level and did not consider the organizational context. Inclusive approaches in the design and development phases were well described; however, the implementation phase remained underexposed. The participatory development, iterative process, and technological development and design domains showed inclusive approaches applied at the start of and during the development, whereas only a few approaches involved end users and iterative processes at the end of the process and during implementation. The literature focused primarily on the individual use of the technology, and the external, organizational, and financial contextual preconditions received less attention. However, members of this target group rely on their (social) environment for care and support. More attention is needed for these underrepresented domains, and key stakeholders should be included further on in the process to reduce the translational gap that exists between the developed technologies and user needs, capabilities, and context.

The tenets of self-determination theory as applied to support were tested with structural equation modelling for 186 people with ID with a mild to borderline level of functioning. The results showed that (a) perceived autonomy support was positively associated with autonomous motivation and with satisfaction of need for autonomy, relatedness, and competence; (b) autonomous motivation and need satisfaction were associated with higher psychological well-being; (c) autonomous motivation and need satisfaction statistically mediated the association between autonomy support and well-being; and (d) satisfaction of need for autonomy and relatedness was negatively associated with controlled motivation, whereas satisfaction of need for relatedness was positively associated with autonomous motivation. The self-determination theory provides insights relevant for improving support for people with intellectual disability.

Background The proliferation of “accessible information” for people with intellectual disabilities in UK health care has accelerated in recent years, underpinned by policy guidance alongside the recent introduction of mandatory standards. However, questions have been raised as to the impact of such resources as a means of enhancing involvement in health care and addressing health inequalities. Objective To review and synthesize the evidence from different approaches used to evaluate the impact of accessible information for people with intellectual disabilities using a meta‐narrative approach. Search strategy Literature searches were iterative and incorporated formal databases, grey literature and hand searches alongside more intuitive and opportunistic methods. Inclusion criteria Included English language papers published before December 2015 described the design and evaluation of written information adapted for adults with intellectual disabilities. Data extraction and synthesis We organized the papers into five groups according to similarity in authors’ writing styles and presentation, epistemology and theoretical foundations, aims and methodologies, professional and organizational identities. Main results The 42 included papers in the five groupings occupied diverse positions on (i) public communication vs individualized materials, (ii) literacy as decontextualized skills vs social practices and (iii) the expertise of patients vs professionals. There was limited evidence for the impact of accessible health information, notwithstanding the potential benefits associated with their creation. Conclusions Individually tailored information is more likely to meet personalized health information needs for people with intellectual disabilities. The emergence of different social formations in the creation of accessible information has potential for advancing engagement of diverse groups.

Purpose Previous reviews about employment for people with intellectual disability (ID) have left questions about employment sustainability unanswered. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to identify and analyse research regarding employment sustainability for people with ID. The research questions were: What research about employment sustainability for people with ID has been published internationally between 2010 and 2020? In the identified studies, how is employment sustainability defined and measured and what are the main findings regarding employment sustainability? Methods A systematic review was conducted using eight databases from various disciplines including medical, health, and social sciences. After a selection process, 10 articles remained, and a framework matrix was created to analyse them. An employment sustainability definition was used as an analytical tool. Results Ten articles were identified as being about employment sustainability for people with ID. Five of them used qualitative designs and five used quantitative designs. Only four out of ten contained a definition of employment sustainability, and there was an inconsistency in measurement methods. The reported findings in the studied articles were categorised into three types: proportions of long-term employed individuals within the studied population, facilitators and barriers to long-term employment. Conclusions There is only a limited amount of research about employment sustainability for people with ID. Nevertheless, a few facilitators and barriers could be identified. There is no consensus about how to define or measure employment sustainability, making comparisons difficult.