Psychological therapies for people with intellectual disabilities: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020169323) was to evaluate the efficacy of psychological therapy for people with intellectual disabilities. METHOD: A comprehensive literature search yielded 22,444 studies which were screened for eligibility. Studies were eligible for inclusion if a psychological therapy was delivered to people with intellectual disabilities compared to a group who did not receive the therapy. Thirty-three controlled trials were eligible for inclusion in the review, with 19 included within a DerSimonian-Laird random effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was completed by clinical presentation, and by comparing randomised trials to non-randomised trials, and group-based to individually delivered psychotherapy. RESULTS: Following the removal of outliers, psychological therapy for a range of mental health problems was associated with a small and significant effect size, g = 0.43, 95% CI [0.20, 0.67], N = 698. There was evidence of heterogeneity and bias due to studies with small sample sizes and a lack of randomisation. Non-randomised studies were associated with a large effect size, g = 0.90, 95% CI [0.47, 1.32], N = 174, while randomised studies were associated with a small effect size, g = 0.36, 95% CI [0.17, 0.55], N = 438, excluding outliers. Individually delivered psychological therapy was associated with a small and non-significant effect size, g = 0.32, 95% CI [-0.01, 0.65], N = 146, while group-based interventions were associated with a small and significant effect size, g = 0.37, 95% CI [0.05, 0.68], N = 361, again, excluding outliers. Psychological therapy for anger was associated with a moderate effect size, g = 0.60, 95% CI [0.26, 0.93], N = 324, while treatment for depression and anxiety was associated with a small and non-significant effect size, g = 0.38, 95% CI [-0.10, 0.85], N = 216, after outliers were removed. CONCLUSIONS: Studies are fraught with methodological weaknesses limiting the ability to make firm conclusions about the effectiveness of psychological therapy for people with intellectual disabilities. Improved reporting standards, appropriately powered and well-designed trials, and greater consideration of the nature and degree of adaptations to therapy are needed to minimise bias and increase the certainty of conclusions.

Inclusiveness of cognitive bias modification research toward children and young people with neurodevelopmental disorders: A systematic review.

Cognitive bias modification (CBM) is increasingly used to target cognitive biases related to internalising or externalising problems, which are common in neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD). This systematic review assesses the available evidence for using CBM in children and young people with NDD, in particular regarding ambiguous interpersonal information, and the extent of their exclusion from this type of intervention research. PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Science Citation Index were consulted using MeSH terms and synonyms of "neurodevelopmental disorders", "mental health problems", "cognitive bias", "modification" and "review". Data extraction focused on the efficacy of CBM for NDD, how CBM was delivered, whether studies adopted exclusion criteria relating to NDD and the rationale for such criteria. The search identified 2270 records, of which twenty-nine studies assessed CBM for interpretations and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Three studies targeted bias in NDD, whereas a third of studies explicitly excluded participants based on NDD-related criteria: most frequently intellectual impairment, reading or learning difficulties and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Only one study provided a rationale for excluding NDD which related to the reading demands of their intervention. There is tentative evidence for the feasibility of using CBM to reduce interpretation bias in children and young people with mild intellectual disability, ASD or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We recommend that CBM research should consider including participants with NDD, use CBM tasks and adaptations that enable this group's inclusion, or provide a sufficient rationale for their exclusion.

Targeting hostile attributions in inclusive schools through online cognitive bias modification: A randomised experiment.

The tendency to make hostile attributions in ambiguous social situations has been associated with aggression and may be targeted through cognitive bias modification for interpretations (CBM-I). Despite their high prevalence of aggression and internalising problems, children and young people with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD) or special educational needs (SEN) are markedly absent from CBM-I studies. This pilot study investigates whether online CBM-I can reduce hostile attributions and reactive aggression in inclusive school pupils. In Study 1, 71 pupils (mean age = 12.2, SD = 1.5; 25.4% presented with NDD or SEN) were randomly allocated to complete three sessions of either CBM-I (n = 37) or active control training (n = 34). CBM-I involved interpreting ambiguous scenarios or faces in a non-hostile manner, whereas the control training involved attention and memory exercises without resolving ambiguity. Between-group comparison showed CBM-I to reduce both hostile attributions and reactive aggression. In Study 2, follow-up focus groups with 23 pupils demonstrated the acceptability of training content and delivery. Together, these findings show online CBM-I to be acceptable and effective at reducing both hostile attributions and reactive aggression in an inclusive setting. The possibility of intervention effects on behavioural outcomes and potential confounding variables require further investigation.

Co-development of an interactive digital intervention to promote the well-being of people with intellectual disabilities.

Digital technologies have great potential in offering interventions for people with intellectual disabilities. In this study, we aimed to co-develop a digital psycho-educational intervention, using a positive resource-oriented approach, to improve the mental well-being of people with intellectual disabilities. Using a two-phase design process, we first used a theory-guided approach to develop the content. Next, iterative consultations with an advisory group of people with and without intellectual disabilities were conducted to proceed with the digital design of the intervention. Feedback from the advisory group addressed issues regarding the intervention's accessibility, interactivity, design and content. Changes were either implemented during the meetings or presented at consecutive meetings until the design and content were deemed satisfactory by the advisory group. This approach demonstrates that people with intellectual disabilities can be included in the development of a novel digital intervention. A future intervention study should determine the practicality and acceptability of this co-developed intervention in routine practice.

Feasibility and Acceptability of an Interactive Mental Well-Being Intervention for People With Intellectual Disabilities: Pilot Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The availability of both digital and traditional mental well-being interventions is rising, but these interventions typically do not consider people with intellectual disabilities as potential users. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to explore the acceptability and feasibility of a new digital intervention, developed with and for people with intellectual disabilities, to improve their subjective well-being. METHODS: Using a single-group pre-post design, participants with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers completed the 4-week intervention. Mixed methods questionnaires assessed the acceptability of the intervention, in addition to self-report and proxy-report measures of subjective well-being and behavioral problems. RESULTS: A total of 12 men with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities enrolled in and completed the study alongside 8 caregivers. Participant acceptability of the intervention was high, and feedback covered multiple aspects of the intervention, including (1) program concept and design, (2) program content, and (3) intervention usage. Self-rated mood barometers indicated mood improvements for 5 participants, deteriorations for 2 participants, and no observed changes for the remaining participants. Statistical analyses yielded no difference from pretest (median=79; range 39-86) to posttest (median=79; range 21-96) for subjective well-being in people with intellectual disabilities (W=10.5; P=.17) and for behavioral problems (W=14; P=.05). CONCLUSIONS: People with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers are receptive to using digital well-being interventions, and this research shows such interventions to be feasible in routine practice. Given the acceptability of the intervention, its potential efficacy can now be evaluated in people with intellectual disabilities and symptoms of reduced mental well-being.

Interventions for mental health problems in children and adults with severe intellectual disabilities: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Mental health problems are more prevalent in people with than without intellectual disabilities, yet treatment options have received little attention. The aim of this study was to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacological and psychological interventions in the treatment of mental health problems in children and adults with severe and profound intellectual disabilities, given their difficulties in accessing standard mental health interventions, particularly talking therapies, and difficulties reporting drug side effects. DESIGN: A systematic review using electronic searches of PsycINFO, PsycTESTS, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC, ASSIA, Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index and CENTRAL was conducted to identify eligible intervention studies. Study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal were performed by two independent reviewers. PARTICIPANTS: Study samples included at least 70% children and/or adults with severe or profound intellectual disabilities or reported the outcomes of this subpopulation separate from participants with other levels of intellectual disabilities. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible intervention studies evaluated a psychological or pharmacological intervention using a control condition or pre-post design. OUTCOMES: Symptom severity, frequency or other quantitative dimension (e.g., impact), as assessed with standardised measures of mental health problems. RESULTS: We retrieved 41 232 records, reviewed 573 full-text articles and identified five studies eligible for inclusion: three studies evaluating pharmacological interventions, and two studies evaluating psychological interventions. Study designs ranged from double-blind placebo controlled crossover trials to single-case experimental reversal designs. Quality appraisals of this very limited literature base revealed good experimental control, poor reporting standards and a lack of follow-up data. CONCLUSIONS: Mental ill health requires vigorous treatment, yet the current evidence base is too limited to identify with precision effective treatments specifically for children or adults with severe and profound intellectual disabilities. Clinicians therefore must work on the basis of general population evidence, while researchers work to generate more precise evidence for people with severe and profound intellectual disabilities. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD 42015024469.

Measurement tools for mental health problems and mental well-being in people with severe or profound intellectual disabilities: A systematic review.

Mental health problems affect people with intellectual disabilities (ID) at rates similar to or in excess of the non-ID population. People with severe ID are likely to have persistent mental health problems. In this systematic review (PROSPERO 2015:CRD42015024469), we identify and evaluate the methodological quality of available measures of mental health problems or well-being in individuals with severe or profound ID. Electronic searches of ten databases identified relevant publications. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles and abstracts of retrieved records (n=41,232) and full-text articles (n=573). Data were extracted and the quality of included papers was appraised. Thirty-two papers reporting on 12 measures were included. Nine measures addressed a broad spectrum of mental health problems, and were largely observational. One physiological measure of well-being was included. The Aberrant Behavior Checklist, Diagnostic Assessment for the Severely Handicapped Scale-II and Mood, Interest and Pleasure Questionnaire are reliable measures in this population. However, the psychometric properties of six other measures were only considered within a single study - indicating a lack of research replication. Few mental health measures are available for people with severe or profound ID, particularly lacking are tools measuring well-being. Assessment methods that do not rely on proxy reports should be explored further.

Using computers to teach people with intellectual disabilities to perform some of the tasks used within cognitive behavioural therapy: A randomised experiment.

AIMS: Training has been shown to improve the ability of people with intellectual disabilities (IDs) to perform some cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) tasks. This study used a computerised training paradigm with the aim of improving the ability of people with IDs to: a) discriminate between behaviours, thoughts and feelings, and b) link situations, thoughts and feelings. METHODS: Fifty-five people with mild-to-moderate IDs were randomly assigned to a training or attention-control condition in a single-blind mixed experimental design. Computerised tasks assessed the participants' skills in: (a) discriminating between behaviours, thoughts and feelings (separately and pooled together), and (b) cognitive mediation by selecting appropriate emotions as consequences to given thoughts, and appropriate thoughts as mediators of given emotions. RESULTS: Training significantly improved ability to discriminate between behaviours, thoughts and feelings pooled together, compared to the attention-control condition, even when controlling for baseline scores and IQ. Large within-group improvements in the ability to identify behaviours and feelings were observed for the training condition, but not the attention-control group. There were no significant between-group differences in ability to identify thoughts, or on cognitive mediation skills. CONCLUSIONS: A single session of computerised training can improve the ability of people with IDs to understand and practise CBT tasks relating to behaviours and feelings. There is potential for computerised training to be used as a "primer" for CBT with people with IDs to improve engagement and outcomes, but further development on a specific computerised cognitive mediation task is needed.

Can a computerised training paradigm assist people with intellectual disabilities to learn cognitive mediation skills? A randomised experiment.

AIMS: The aim was to examine whether specific skills required for cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) could be taught using a computerised training paradigm with people who have intellectual disabilities (IDs). Training aimed to improve: a) ability to link pairs of situations and mediating beliefs to emotions, and b) ability to link pairs of situations and emotions to mediating beliefs. METHOD: Using a single-blind mixed experimental design, sixty-five participants with IDs were randomised to receive either computerised training or an attention-control condition. Cognitive mediation skills were assessed before and after training. RESULTS: Participants who received training were significantly better at selecting appropriate emotions within situation-beliefs pairs, controlling for baseline scores and IQ. Despite significant improvements in the ability of those who received training to correctly select intermediating beliefs for situation-feelings pairings, no between-group differences were observed at post-test. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated that computerised training led to a significant improvement in some aspects of cognitive mediation for people with IDs, but whether this has a positive effect upon outcome from therapy is yet to be established.

Psychological therapies for people with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of psychological therapies for people with intellectual disabilities (IDs) through a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature. A comprehensive literature search identified 143 intervention studies. Twenty-two trials were eligible for review, and 14 of these were subsequently included in the meta-analysis. Many studies did not include adequate information about their participants, especially the nature of their IDs; information about masked assessment, and therapy fidelity was also lacking. The meta-analysis yielded an overall moderate between-group effect size, g=.682, while group-based interventions had a moderate but smaller treatment effect than individual-based interventions. Cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) was efficacious for both anger and depression, while interventions aimed at improving interpersonal functioning were not effectual. When CBT was excluded, there was insufficient evidence regarding the efficacy of other psychological therapies, or psychological therapies intended to treat mental health problems in children and young people with IDs. Adults with IDs and concurrent mental health problems appear to benefit from psychological therapies. However, clinical trials need to make use of improved reporting standards and larger samples.