Support Needs of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Implications for Their Assessment.

The construct of support needs has become a key aspect for the diagnostics, classification, and interventional management of autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). However, instruments specifically designed to assess support needs in this population are not available. Currently, the Supports Intensity Scale for Children (SIS-C), which could be administered to assess students with any type of intellectual disability (ID), is the only valid tool able to assess support needs in Spain. Our aim was to verify whether the SIS-C is useful for assessing the support needs of students with ASD, regardless of whether or not they present ID. The participants were subdivided into two groups. One group included students with ASD and ID (n = 248), and the other comprised participants with ASD without an ID (n = 44). The results of the two groups were compared with those reported in the original validation sample of the SIS-C, which involved participants with ID without ASD (n = 566). The results showed that this scale could be useful for assessing support needs in the three subgroups, but it appeared that different standardized norms based on the characteristics of each specific population would be appropriate.

Validity of DSM-5 Oppositional Defiant Disorder Symptoms in Children with Intellectual Disability.

Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is one of the most frequently diagnosed disorders in children with intellectual disabilities (ID). However, the high variability of results in prevalence studies suggests problems that should be investigated further, such as the possible overlap between some ODD symptoms and challenging behaviors that are especially prevalent in children with ID. The study aimed to investigate whether there are differences in the functioning of ODD symptoms between children with (n = 189) and without (n = 474) intellectual disabilities. To do so, we analyzed the extent to which parental ratings on DSM-5 ODD symptoms were metrically invariant between groups using models based on item response theory. The results indicated that two symptoms were non-invariant, with degrees of bias ranging from moderately high ("annoys others on purpose") to moderately low ("argues with adults"). Caution is advised in the use of these symptoms for the assessment and diagnosis of ODD in children with ID. Once the bias was controlled, the measurement model suggested prevalences of 8.4% (children with ID) and 3% (typically developing children). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

A Systematic Review of the Assessment of Support Needs in People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

An evaluation of support needs is fundamental to the provision of services to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Services should be organized by considering the support that people need to improve their quality of life and enforce their rights as citizens. This systematic review is conducted to analyze the rigor and usefulness of the available standardized tools for assessing support needs, as well as the uses of their results. Several databases were consulted, including Web of Sciences, Scopus, PubMed, ProQuest Central, PsycInfo, ERIC, and CINAHL, and the 86 documents that met the review criteria were organized into four sections: (a) measurement tools, (b) descriptive/correlational studies, (c) predictive studies, and (d) interventions. The results showed that age, level of intellectual disability, adaptive behavior skills, the number and type of associated disabilities, and medical and behavioral needs affected the support needs of people with disabilities. Quality of life outcomes have been predicted by the individual's support needs, explaining a significant percentage of their variability. The findings are useful in guiding assessments and planning interventions. Further research should address the effectiveness of specific support strategies and the development of social policies and indicators for inclusion that involve assessing support needs.

Differences in the support needs of children with developmental disabilities among groups of medical and behavioral needs.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Medical and behavioral needs are relevant in organizing and providing support strategies that improve the quality of life for children, along with their families. The present study aims to examine the impact of medical and behavioral needs on the need for support of children with disabilities. METHODS: Health and education professionals were interviewed using the Supports Intensity Scale-Children's version to estimate the support needs of 911 children and adolescents (5-16 years) with an intellectual disability, including 55.32% with an additional disability. For data analysis, a model for measuring support needs was specified, consisting of seven support needs factors and three method factors. In estimating the model, four groups of medical and behavioral needs were considered. The factor scores' means of the groups were compared through t-tests. RESULTS: Medical and behavioral needs had an impact on overall support needs. Differences were found in all support domains for medical needs. The greatest influence of behavioral needs was found in the Social and School participation areas but was indistinguishable between the mild and moderate levels of needs. CONCLUSIONS: Medical and behavioral needs greatly affect the need for support in a child's daily life, so they need to be considered a priority for support services. The importance of standardized assessments is emphasized to help develop support strategies.

Measuring support needs in children with motor disability: Validity and utility of the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS-C).

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether the Supports Intensity Scale-Children's version (SIS-C) is valid and useful to assess support needs for children with motor and intellectual disabilities. AIMS: (a) To assess the structural validity of the SIS-C using factor analyses in a sample of children with motor disabilities; and (b) to analyze the SIS-C's reliability and its discriminative capacity in children with different levels of motor function. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: A cross-sectional design was used to assess 210 children (aged 5-16 years). Among them, 88% had an intellectual disability and 84% had cerebral palsy, with variations in mobility (Gross Motor Function Classification System; level V: 56.19%), handling of objects (Manual Ability Classification System; level V: 38.09%), and communicating (Communication Function Classification System; level V: 42.86%). OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: The model with seven support needs factors and three method factors showed the best fit. The support needs model was reliable and indicated high convergent validity. However, the SIS-C scores showed a strong ceiling effect in children with more significant limitations in gross and fine motor functions. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The seven-dimensional model of support needs could be replicated in children with motor disabilities. However, the usefulness of SIS-C is limited in discriminating between children with greater restrictions in mobility and handling of objects.

A new scale for measuring quality of life in acquired brain injury.

PURPOSE: A common and frequent consequence of an acquired brain injury (ABI) is the diminished quality of life (QoL) of affected people. Because the majority of existing QoL instruments assess health-related domains, new instruments that allow for the evaluation of the QoL from an integral perspective that considers the context and personal factors of the individual are warranted. Hence, the purpose of this study is to develop and validate an instrument with these characteristics. METHODS: The CAVIDACE scale is a new 64-item specific instrument to assess QoL in people with ABI based on a third-person perspective. The validation sample comprises 421 adults with ABI, with ages ranging from 17 to 90 years (M = 53.12; SD = 14.87). The scale was completed by 97 professionals and 58 family members. Validity evidence based on the internal structure of the scale was provided through confirmatory factor analyses. Reliability was analyzed in terms of internal consistency and inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: The results supported the internal structure of the scale, based on the theoretical and assessment framework in which QoL is composed of eight intercorrelated first-order domains (CFI = 0.890, RMSEA = 0.065, SRMR = 0.071). The internal consistency was good or excellent for the eight domains (ordinal alpha ranging from 0.77 to 0.93). The inter-rater reliability was very high (0.97). CONCLUSIONS: The CAVIDACE scale is found to be a specific instrument with excellent psychometric properties that is helpful for the assessment of QoL in people with ABI, both in clinical practice and for research purposes.