↓ Skip to main content

Organising healthcare services for persons with an intellectual disability

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2016
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
186 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Organising healthcare services for persons with an intellectual disability
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007492.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Balogh, Carly A McMorris, Yona Lunsky, Helene Ouellette-Kuntz, Laurie Bourne, Angela Colantonio, Daniela C. Gonçalves-Bradley

Abstract

When compared to the general population, persons with an intellectual disability have lower life expectancy, higher morbidity, and more difficulty finding and obtaining healthcare. Organisational interventions are used to reconfigure the structure or delivery of healthcare services. This is the first update of the original review. To assess the effects of organisational interventions of healthcare services for the mental and physical health problems of persons with an intellectual disability. For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and other databases, from April 2006 to 4 September 2015. We checked reference lists of included studies and consulted experts in the field. Randomised controlled trials of organisational interventions of healthcare services aimed at improving care of mental and physical health problems of adult persons with an intellectual disability. We employed standard methodological procedures as outlined in the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions, in addition to specific guidance from the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. We identified one new trial from the updated searches.Seven trials (347 participants) met the selection criteria. The interventions varied but had common components: interventions that increased the intensity and frequency of service delivery (4 trials, 200 participants), community-based specialist behaviour therapy (1 trial, 63 participants), and outreach treatment (1 trial, 50 participants). Another trial compared two active arms (traditional counselling and integrated intervention for bereavement, 34 participants).The included studies investigated interventions dealing with the mental health problems of persons with an intellectual disability; none focused on physical health problems. Four studies assessed the effect of organisational interventions on behavioural problems for persons with an intellectual disability, three assessed care giver burden, and three assessed the costs associated with the interventions. None of the included studies reported data on the effect of organisational interventions on adverse events. Most studies were assessed as having low risk of bias.It is uncertain whether interventions that increase the frequency and intensity of delivery or outreach treatment decrease behavioural problems for persons with an intellectual disability (two and one trials respectively, very low certainty evidence). Behavioural problems were slightly decreased by community-based specialist behavioural therapy (one trial, low certainty evidence). Increasing the frequency and intensity of service delivery probably makes little or no difference to care giver burden (MD 0.03, 95% CI -3.48 to 3.54, two trials, moderate certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether outreach treatment makes any difference for care giver burden (one trial, very low certainty evidence). There was very limited evidence regarding costs, with low to very low certainty evidence for the different interventions. There is very limited evidence on the organisation of healthcare services for persons with an intellectual disability. There are currently no well-designed studies focusing on organising the health services of persons with an intellectual disability and concurrent physical problems. There are very few studies of organisational interventions targeting mental health needs and the results of those that were found need corroboration. There is an urgent need for high-quality health services research to identify optimal health services for persons with an intellectual disability and concurrent physical problem.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 186 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Uganda 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 177 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 15%
Unspecified 27 15%
Student > Master 24 13%
Student > Bachelor 18 10%
Other 53 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 32%
Unspecified 34 18%
Social Sciences 27 15%
Psychology 26 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 10%
Other 22 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 30 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,466,129
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,919
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,320
of 265,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#85
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 265,213 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.