Search

Background: Inclusive research requires adapting methodologies to meet the needs of people with all degrees of intellectual disabilities. However, it must also balance this with the requirements of academic research. Building from previous research a study was completed to illustrate how photovoice could not only be adapted to meet the needs of people with intellectual disabilities who have limited or no verbal communication but to also explore how they express their identity. Methods: A qualitative multiple case study method was used to explore identity expression amongst three participants with intellectual disabilities and limited or no verbal communication. The methodology integrated ethnographic observations, photovoice and interview techniques. Findings: Integrating the ethnographic observations, photovoice and interview techniques offered families and carers the opportunity to become curious about participants' identities, and this methodology was considered valuable in getting to know more about the person. Conclusions: It is hoped that through conducting research that directly involves people with intellectual disabilities, more creative and inclusive methods can be explored, verified and applied across various research contexts.

Background: People with learning disabilities experience health and social inequalities, and research that could improve health services may not be implemented in real‐life settings. Building stakeholder networks that can share and implement research findings may address this. This paper presents a framework for building a stakeholder network that maximises the likelihood of research recommendations being implemented in practice. This was developed as part of the 'Making Positive Moves' (MPM) study, which explores the experiences of people with learning disabilities following discharge from a residential stay within a hospital inpatient setting. Methods: We reviewed the literature on existing theoretical frameworks to support the development of a model for dissemination of the MPM findings. Stakeholder categories were identified through consultation with the MPM researchers, experts by experience and the steering group and a hub and spoke model to represent all stakeholder categories was created. These categories include person moving; family of the person moving; specialist schools; social care; care providers; regulators; third sector organisations; policy organisations; academic community; and NHS professionals. After establishing the categories, we consulted with people with learning disabilities and other stakeholders and conducted online searches to create a stakeholder database. Through information gathering and direct contact with stakeholders, we assessed levels of interest, power and engagement to determine which stakeholders to prioritise in our dissemination activities. The Stakeholder Wheel was created to present the data captured within the database and engagement profiles in an illustrative way. Findings: We use two stakeholder sub‐categories, user‐led organisations and care providers, to demonstrate the methodological approach. The examples illustrate how a scoring system helped us to identify high‐priority stakeholders who we then contacted to collaborate within developing our dissemination strategy to maximise the impact of the MPM research findings. Conclusions: We developed a framework to map stakeholders for the MPM study and enable targeted dissemination to increase the impact of the research. This approach has the potential to reduce health inequalities among people with learning disabilities by increasing the awareness of and ability to implement evidence‐based recommendations in real‐life settings. The stakeholder mapping framework could be applied to research projects associated with learning disabilities to bridge the gap between research and practice and reduce health inequalities. Accessible Summary: People with learning disabilities experience unfair disadvantages relating to their health. These are known as health and social inequalities.Findings from research projects can help improve health and social care for people with learning disabilities, but only if people know about and are able to apply the research recommendations.Finding people and organisations who can make use of the research findings (known as stakeholders) is an important first step in sharing research. Working with stakeholders to think about how they use the findings to change practice can improve care and services.We have been doing this for one research project called Making Positive Moves and it has helped us plan how to share our findings. Our approach could be used by other researchers to make it more likely that their research findings will be used to make a difference in the lives of people with learning disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with learning disabilities are moving out of hospitals as part of the Transforming Care programme, although thus far their views on how they have experienced this have not been researched. Materials and Methods: A qualitative design was used to explore how people with learning disabilities experienced moving as part of Transforming Care. Eleven people took part in semi-structured interviews; they were supported by Key Support People (n = 9) who knew them well. A social constructionist Grounded Theory approach was used in analysis. Results and Discussion: People reported that their relationships with other people, including friends, family and staff, played a significant role in how they experienced the move. Moving was also an opportunity for people to shift their ideas about who they were as a person and opened up a wider array of stories about their identity. Conclusions: A number of recommendations are discussed, relevant for staff working in this field to support positive transitions out of hospital.

Qualitative research continues to rely heavily on verbal language from solely the participant, which often omits the lived experiences of many people across a range of populations. This paper describes adaptations to an established research methodology, dyadic interviewing, which aims to open up possibilities of hearing unheard voices. Namely, we present an extension to the dyadic interview method as outlined by Caldwell (2014), in which the clinical systemic technique of Internalised Other interviewing is used to further focus in on the perspective of the participant. This method has been used by the authors in a research project with people with intellectual disabilities (Head et al., 2018), which gave people who may not have otherwise participated an opportunity to have their voices heard. A critical analysis of the use of the method is presented, with practical advice on its use. The authors argue that the methodology could be used with a number of populations in clinical and social research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This paper describes a systemic exercise for clinical staff facing multiple changes to team structure and threats to their sense of belonging. The exercise was adapted from a consultation intervention that addressed a team's resourcefulness in responding to behaviours that challenge in intellectual disabilities (Smyly, 2006). As clinical psychology trainees from outside the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS), we aimed to facilitate a context in which staff could share past experiences of collectively overcoming challenges, and in this way nourish a sense of belonging. Through building layers of dialogue, taking the observer perspective and reflection in the context of such threats to personal, professional and team identities, a shared direction may be claimed again. Practitioner points: Providing space for teams to reflect on past experiences of overcoming challenging situations may empower teams and enhance a sense of belonging during difficult transitions Moving towards an explorative and interactive space for personal and professional selves, away from problem‐saturated narratives, creates a context for innovation and change Exercises that develop layers of conversation can scaffold relational risk‐taking, celebrate difference, and guide collaboration towards developing narratives of belonging [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]