Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBishop, R
dc.contributor.authorLaugharne, R
dc.contributor.authorShaw, N
dc.contributor.authorRussell, AM
dc.contributor.authorGoodley, D
dc.contributor.authorBanerjee, S
dc.contributor.authorClack, E
dc.contributor.authorShankar, R
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-13T08:02:58Z
dc.date.available2023-10-13T08:02:58Z
dc.date.issued2024-02
dc.identifier.issn0964-2633
dc.identifier.issn1365-2788
dc.identifier.urihttps://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/handle/10026.1/21410
dc.description.abstract

Background The study aims to understand system barriers to research participation for people with intellectual disabilities.

Methods 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.

Results 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.

Conclusion 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.

dc.format.extent140-149
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic
dc.languageen
dc.publisherWiley
dc.subjectEthics
dc.subjectIntellectual Disability
dc.subject(Global) Developmental Delay
dc.subjectMethodology in research
dc.titleThe inclusion of adults with intellectual disabilities in health research – challenges, barriers and opportunities: a mixed‐method study among stakeholders in England
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeArticle
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37815212
plymouth.issue2
plymouth.volume68
plymouth.publisher-urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jir.13097
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalJournal of Intellectual Disability Research
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jir.13097
plymouth.organisational-group|Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group|Plymouth|Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group|Plymouth|Users by role
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-09-19
dc.date.updated2023-10-13T08:02:58Z
dc.rights.embargodate2023-10-21
dc.identifier.eissn1365-2788
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1111/jir.13097


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV