The characteristics of users of an online screening tool for children and adolescents with intellectual disability and of those being screened.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Intellectual Disabilities Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1177/17446295241272698
Karen McKenzie, Kara R Murray, Judith Thompson, Karen Horridge, Kirsty Greenwell, Aja L Murray
{"title":"The characteristics of users of an online screening tool for children and adolescents with intellectual disability and of those being screened.","authors":"Karen McKenzie, Kara R Murray, Judith Thompson, Karen Horridge, Kirsty Greenwell, Aja L Murray","doi":"10.1177/17446295241272698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Screening tools can help with the identification of intellectual disability, but little is known about who uses them. This study analysed anonymous information from 2691 users of an evidence-based, online, intellectual disability screening questionnaire for children and adolescents (CAIDS-Q) to explore the characteristics of the users and of those being screened. The users were split almost equally between parents/family members (48.6%) and professionals (49.9%), with the majority (63.8%) of the latter group being health staff. Significant differences in the characteristics of the children being screened were found, according to whether the user was a parent/family member or a professional, with the overall pattern suggesting that professionals screened children with greater complexity of needs, but about whom less was known. The screened children had a range of areas of difficulties that are common to those with intellectual disability. Implications for practice are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":46904,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17446295241272698","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Screening tools can help with the identification of intellectual disability, but little is known about who uses them. This study analysed anonymous information from 2691 users of an evidence-based, online, intellectual disability screening questionnaire for children and adolescents (CAIDS-Q) to explore the characteristics of the users and of those being screened. The users were split almost equally between parents/family members (48.6%) and professionals (49.9%), with the majority (63.8%) of the latter group being health staff. Significant differences in the characteristics of the children being screened were found, according to whether the user was a parent/family member or a professional, with the overall pattern suggesting that professionals screened children with greater complexity of needs, but about whom less was known. The screened children had a range of areas of difficulties that are common to those with intellectual disability. Implications for practice are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
智障儿童和青少年在线筛查工具用户和被筛查者的特征。
筛查工具可以帮助识别智力障碍,但对于谁在使用这些工具却知之甚少。本研究分析了以证据为基础的在线儿童和青少年智障筛查问卷(CAIDS-Q)的 2691 名用户的匿名信息,以探讨用户和被筛查者的特征。使用者中父母/家庭成员(48.6%)和专业人员(49.9%)几乎各占一半,而后者中的大多数(63.8%)是医务人员。根据使用者是父母/家庭成员还是专业人员,我们发现被筛查儿童的特征存在显著差异,总体模式表明,专业人员筛查的儿童需求更为复杂,但对他们的了解较少。接受筛查的儿童有一系列智障儿童常见的困难。本文讨论了对实践的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: The principal aim of the journal is to provide a medium for the exchange of best practice, knowledge and research between academic and professional disciplines from education, social and health settings to bring about advancement of services for people with intellectual disabilities. The idea of a practice-led journal is both exciting and timely. This journal serves as a medium for all those involved with people with intellectual disabilities to submit and publish papers on issues relevant to promoting services for people with intellectual disabilities.
期刊最新文献
A systematic review of attachment interventions for people with intellectual disability and their caregivers. The effect of motor dual-task training on gait and mobility performances in children with intellectual disabilities. Evidence-based decision-making in the treatment of speech, language, and communication disorders in Down syndrome; a scoping review. How differentiated can a new tablet-based reading screening measure the reading proficiency of students with intellectual disabilities? Comparing the impact of disability, disability type and grade level on reading skills. Trauma-informed counseling for individuals who have an intellectual developmental disorder: Considerations for mental health counselors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1