↓ Skip to main content

The inclusion of adults with intellectual disabilities in health research – challenges, barriers and opportunities: a mixed‐method study among stakeholders in England

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, October 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
34 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The inclusion of adults with intellectual disabilities in health research – challenges, barriers and opportunities: a mixed‐method study among stakeholders in England
Published in
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, October 2023
DOI 10.1111/jir.13097
Pubmed ID
Authors

R. Bishop, R. Laugharne, N. Shaw, A. M. Russell, D. Goodley, S. Banerjee, E. Clack, SpeakUp, CHAMPS, R. Shankar

Abstract

The study aims to understand system barriers to research participation for people with intellectual disabilities. A mixed-methods approach examined the inclusivity of people with intellectual disabilities (IDs) in a random sample of National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) studies conducted in 2019-2020. An online questionnaire (stage 1) was sent to the selected studies lead investigators. An expert by experience panel of 25 people with intellectual disabilities (IDs, stage 2), discussed the stage 1 feedback. Descriptive statistics for quantitative data and thematic analysis for qualitative data was conducted. Of 180 studies reviewed, 131 studies (78%) excluded people with IDs. Of these, 45 (34.3%) study researchers provided feedback. Seven (20%) of the 34 studies which included people with IDs gave feedback. Of all respondents over half felt their study had some relevance to people with IDs. A minority (7.6%) stated their study had no relevance. For a quarter of respondents (23.5%), resource issues were a challenge. Qualitative analysis of both stages produced four overarching themes of Research design and delivery, Informed consent, Resource allocation, and Knowledge and skills. Health research continues to exclude people with IDs. Researchers and experts by experience identified non-accessible research design, lack of confidence with capacity and consent processes, limited resources such as time and a need for training as barriers. Ethics committees appear reluctant to include people with cognitive deficits to 'protect' them. People with IDs want to be included in research, not only as participants but also through coproduction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 20%
Student > Master 1 5%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 9 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 3 15%
Unspecified 2 10%
Psychology 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 8 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,744,368
of 25,836,587 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intellectual Disability Research
#63
of 1,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,587
of 361,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intellectual Disability Research
#2
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,836,587 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,575 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,134 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.