ABSTRACT
AIM: The aim of the present study was to standardize and generate psychometric evidence of the German language versions of two well-established English language mental health instruments: the Aberrant Behavior Checklist-Community (ABC-C) and the Psychiatric Assessment Schedule for Adults with Developmental Disabilities (PAS-ADD) Checklist. New methods in this field were introduced: a simulation method for testing the factor structure and an exploration of long-term stability over two years. METHODS: The checklists were both administered to a representative sample of 270 individuals with intellectual disability (ID) and, two years later in a second data collection, to 128 participants of the original sample. Principal component analysis and parallel analysis were performed. Reliability measures, long-term stability, subscale intercorrelations, as well as standardized norms were generated. Prevalence of mental health problems was examined. RESULTS: Psychometric properties were mostly excellent, with long-term stability showing moderate to strong effects. The original factor structure of the ABC-C was replicated. PAS-ADD Checklist produced a similar, but still different structure compared with findings from the English language area. The overall prevalence rate of mental health problems in the sample was about 20%. CONCLUSION: Considering the good results on the measured psychometric properties, the two checklists are recommended for the early detection of mental health problems in persons with ID.
Subject(s)
Developmental Disabilities/psychology , Intellectual Disability/psychology , Mental Disorders/psychology , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales/standards , Psychometrics/methods , Psychometrics/standards , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Developmental Disabilities/diagnosis , Developmental Disabilities/epidemiology , Disability Evaluation , Female , Germany , Humans , Intellectual Disability/diagnosis , Intellectual Disability/epidemiology , Language Tests/standards , Language Tests/statistics & numerical data , Male , Mental Disorders/diagnosis , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales/statistics & numerical data , Psychometrics/statistics & numerical data , Social Behavior , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: POMONA II was a European Commission public health-funded project. The research questions in this article focus on age-specific differences relating to environmental and lifestyle factors, and the 17 medical conditions measured by the POMONA Checklist of Health Indicators (P15). METHOD: The P15 was completed in a cross-sectional design for a stratified sample of 1,253 adults with ID across 14 European member states. RESULTS: Older people (55+) were more likely to live in larger residential homes. Rates of smoking and use of alcohol were lower than in the general population but were higher with older age. More than 60% of older adults had a sedentary lifestyle. Cataract, hearing disorder, diabetes, hypertension, osteoarthritis/arthrosis, and osteoporosis were positively associated with advancing age; allergies and epilepsy, negatively associated. CONCLUSIONS: Some evidence of health disparities was found for older people with ID, particularly in terms of underdiagnosed or inadequately managed preventable health conditions.
Subject(s)
Aging/physiology , Health Status , Intellectual Disability/epidemiology , Adult , Age Distribution , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aging/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Europe , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Healthcare Disparities , Humans , Intellectual Disability/classification , Life Style , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors , Rural Population , Severity of Illness Index , Socioeconomic Factors , Urban Population , White People , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To study health inequalities in persons with intellectual disabilities, representative and unbiased samples are needed. Little is known about sample recruitment in this vulnerable group. This study aimed to determine differences in ethical procedures and sample recruitment in a multicenter research on health of persons with intellectual disabilities. Study questions regarded the practical sampling procedure, how ethical consent was obtained in each country, and which person gave informed consent for each study participant. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Exploratory, as part of a multicenter study, in 14 European countries. After developing identical guidelines for all countries, partners collected data on health indicators by orally interviewing 1,269 persons with intellectual disabilities. Subsequently, semistructured interviews were carried out with partners and researchers. RESULTS: Identification of sufficient study participants proved feasible. Sampling frames differed from nationally estimated proportions of persons with intellectual disabilities living with families or in residential settings. Sometimes, people with intellectual disabilities were hard to trace. Consent procedures and legal representation varied broadly. Nonresponse data proved unavailable. CONCLUSION: To build representative unbiased samples of vulnerable groups with limited academic capacities, international consensus on respectful consent procedures and tailored patient information is necessary.
