Search

Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is one of the most frequently diagnosed disorders in children with intellectual disabilities (ID). However, the high variability of results in prevalence studies suggests problems that should be investigated further, such as the possible overlap between some ODD symptoms and challenging behaviors that are especially prevalent in children with ID. The study aimed to investigate whether there are differences in the functioning of ODD symptoms between children with (n = 189) and without (n = 474) intellectual disabilities. To do so, we analyzed the extent to which parental ratings on DSM-5 ODD symptoms were metrically invariant between groups using models based on item response theory. The results indicated that two symptoms were non-invariant, with degrees of bias ranging from moderately high (“annoys others on purpose”) to moderately low (“argues with adults”). Caution is advised in the use of these symptoms for the assessment and diagnosis of ODD in children with ID. Once the bias was controlled, the measurement model suggested prevalences of 8.4% (children with ID) and 3% (typically developing children). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Inclusive education of students with disabilities in general education contexts has been a global movement for at least 30 years. We completed a systematic review of articles published in E...

Assessing quality of life of people with brain injury has a relevant role for developing strategies focused on personal outcomes that allow us to guide good practices and rehabilitation. So far, assessment of quality of life for this population has been restricted to an evaluation of personal outcomes from a health-related quality of life perspective. This approach it is mostly centered on physical health, however, quality of life needs to be addressed from a holistic and multidimensional perspective. The goal of this study is to identify core indicators of quality of life in brain injury based on a comprehensive theoretical model focused on the most relevant aspects of this population functioning. A Delphi study was carried out to obtain the specific core indicators of quality of life for this population. The methodology used to reach a consensus about the best indicators and items to measure quality of life involved four rounds and 14 experts on rehabilitation of people with brain injury. The Delphi study provided evidence of content validity for the field-test version of a new scale that will be applied to a wide sample in order to empirically check its suitability for this population.

Background This study assessed the equivalence of the measurement of support needs between children with intellectual disability (ID) and children with intellectual and motor disabilities (IMD) and compared both groups in the different domains of support. Method The Supports Intensity Scale-Children's Version was used to assess the support needs of 713 children with ID and 286 children with IMD, mainly associated with cerebral palsy. Results The results supported measurement invariance between the group of ID and IMD, which allowed to conduct comparison between them. Children with IMD scored higher on support needs than did children without IMD, suggesting that children with IMD needed more support than their peers without motor impairments. Furthermore, the ID levels interacted with motor impairments: at the highest levels of ID, groups tended to be similar in support needs, with high scores and low variability. The greatest differences were found in the domains of Home and Community activities. Conclusions This study points to the across-condition of the construct of support needs in populations with intellectual and developmental disabilities. However, additional mobility impairments should be considered during the evaluation and planning of systems of support. In this regard, the Supports Intensity Scale-Children's Version might have limitations when discriminating between samples with high support needs.

A common and frequent consequence of an acquired brain injury (ABI) is the diminished quality of life (QoL) of affected people. Because the majority of existing QoL instruments assess health-related domains, new instruments that allow for the evaluation of the QoL from an integral perspective that considers the context and personal factors of the individual are warranted. Hence, the purpose of this study is to develop and validate an instrument with these characteristics. The CAVIDACE scale is a new 64-item specific instrument to assess QoL in people with ABI based on a third-person perspective. The validation sample comprises 421 adults with ABI, with ages ranging from 17 to 90 years (M = 53.12; SD = 14.87). The scale was completed by 97 professionals and 58 family members. Validity evidence based on the internal structure of the scale was provided through confirmatory factor analyses. Reliability was analyzed in terms of internal consistency and inter-rater reliability. The results supported the internal structure of the scale, based on the theoretical and assessment framework in which QoL is composed of eight intercorrelated first-order domains (CFI = 0.890, RMSEA = 0.065, SRMR = 0.071). The internal consistency was good or excellent for the eight domains (ordinal alpha ranging from 0.77 to 0.93). The inter-rater reliability was very high (0.97). The CAVIDACE scale is found to be a specific instrument with excellent psychometric properties that is helpful for the assessment of QoL in people with ABI, both in clinical practice and for research purposes.

An evaluation of support needs is fundamental to the provision of services to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Services should be organized by considering the support that people need to improve their quality of life and enforce their rights as citizens. This systematic review is conducted to analyze the rigor and usefulness of the available standardized tools for assessing support needs, as well as the uses of their results. Several databases were consulted, including Web of Sciences, Scopus, PubMed, ProQuest Central, PsycInfo, ERIC, and CINAHL, and the 86 documents that met the review criteria were organized into four sections: (a) measurement tools, (b) descriptive/correlational studies, (c) predictive studies, and (d) interventions. The results showed that age, level of intellectual disability, adaptive behavior skills, the number and type of associated disabilities, and medical and behavioral needs affected the support needs of people with disabilities. Quality of life outcomes have been predicted by the individual’s support needs, explaining a significant percentage of their variability. The findings are useful in guiding assessments and planning interventions. Further research should address the effectiveness of specific support strategies and the development of social policies and indicators for inclusion that involve assessing support needs.

Background/Aims Medical and behavioral needs are relevant in organizing and providing support strategies that improve the quality of life for children, along with their families. The present study aims to examine the impact of medical and behavioral needs on the need for support of children with disabilities. Methods Health and education professionals were interviewed using the Supports Intensity Scale-Children’s version to estimate the support needs of 911 children and adolescents (5–16 years) with an intellectual disability, including 55.32% with an additional disability. For data analysis, a model for measuring support needs was specified, consisting of seven support needs factors and three method factors. In estimating the model, four groups of medical and behavioral needs were considered. The factor scores’ means of the groups were compared through t-tests. Results Medical and behavioral needs had an impact on overall support needs. Differences were found in all support domains for medical needs. The greatest influence of behavioral needs was found in the Social and School participation areas but was indistinguishable between the mild and moderate levels of needs. Conclusions Medical and behavioral needs greatly affect the need for support in a child’s daily life, so they need to be considered a priority for support services. The importance of standardized assessments is emphasized to help develop support strategies.

The right to educational inclusion for students with intellectual disability (SWID) requires the development of good assessment and intervention practices from holistic perspectives not exclusively focused on the academic limitations that SWID may present. These practices are settled in Spain, via regulations drawn up by each Autonomous Community (AC). The variety of existing regulations demands a critical review of the decisions taken to promote the inclusion of those students.current regulations-in-force in each AC that regulate attention to diversity (AD) have been were analyzed by using a checklist that includes the variables that defining each stage of the AD process and the ways of providing supports that favor the development, learning and participation of SWID.attention to diversity measures in each AC emphasize organizational and curricular issues, with no AC following holistic approaches in both assessment and intervention, but rather neglecting self-determination and the promotion of quality of life for SWID.guidelines for the development of new legal frameworks and professional practices based on the latest evidence-based models of attention to SWID and on the results are discussed.

Background It is unknown whether the Supports Intensity Scale-Children’s version (SIS-C) is valid and useful to assess support needs for children with motor and intellectual disabilities. Aims (a) To assess the structural validity of the SIS-C using factor analyses in a sample of children with motor disabilities; and (b) to analyze the SIS-C’s reliability and its discriminative capacity in children with different levels of motor function. Methods and Procedures A cross-sectional design was used to assess 210 children (aged 5–16 years). Among them, 88% had an intellectual disability and 84% had cerebral palsy, with variations in mobility (Gross Motor Function Classification System; level V: 56.19%), handling of objects (Manual Ability Classification System; level V: 38.09%), and communicating (Communication Function Classification System; level V: 42.86%). Outcomes and Results The model with seven support needs factors and three method factors showed the best fit. The support needs model was reliable and indicated high convergent validity. However, the SIS-C scores showed a strong ceiling effect in children with more significant limitations in gross and fine motor functions. Conclusions and Implications The seven-dimensional model of support needs could be replicated in children with motor disabilities. However, the usefulness of SIS-C is limited in discriminating between children with greater restrictions in mobility and handling of objects.