智障人士并发精神障碍评估中的偏差:理论视角及对临床实践的影响。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Intellectual Disabilities Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-28 DOI:10.1177/17446295231154119
Arvid Nikolai Kildahl, Hanne Weie Oddli, Sissel Berge Helverschou
{"title":"智障人士并发精神障碍评估中的偏差:理论视角及对临床实践的影响。","authors":"Arvid Nikolai Kildahl, Hanne Weie Oddli, Sissel Berge Helverschou","doi":"10.1177/17446295231154119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Influence from bias is unavoidable in clinical decision-making, and mental health assessment seems particularly vulnerable. Individuals with intellectual disabilities have increased risk of developing co-occurring mental disorder. Due to the inherent difficulties associated with intellectual disabilities, assessment of mental health in this population often relies on a different set of strategies, and it is unclear how these may affect risk of bias. In this theoretical paper, we apply recent conceptualisations of bias in clinical decision-making to the specific challenges and strategies in mental health assessment in intellectual disabilities. We suggest that clinical decision-making in these assessments is particularly vulnerable to bias, including sources of bias present in mental health assessment in the general population, as well as potential sources of bias which may be specific to assessments in this population. It follows that to manage potential bias, triangulating information from multi-informant, multi-method, interdisciplinary assessment strategies is likely to be necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":46904,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11059834/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bias in assessment of co-occurring mental disorder in individuals with intellectual disabilities: Theoretical perspectives and implications for clinical practice.\",\"authors\":\"Arvid Nikolai Kildahl, Hanne Weie Oddli, Sissel Berge Helverschou\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17446295231154119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Influence from bias is unavoidable in clinical decision-making, and mental health assessment seems particularly vulnerable. Individuals with intellectual disabilities have increased risk of developing co-occurring mental disorder. Due to the inherent difficulties associated with intellectual disabilities, assessment of mental health in this population often relies on a different set of strategies, and it is unclear how these may affect risk of bias. In this theoretical paper, we apply recent conceptualisations of bias in clinical decision-making to the specific challenges and strategies in mental health assessment in intellectual disabilities. We suggest that clinical decision-making in these assessments is particularly vulnerable to bias, including sources of bias present in mental health assessment in the general population, as well as potential sources of bias which may be specific to assessments in this population. It follows that to manage potential bias, triangulating information from multi-informant, multi-method, interdisciplinary assessment strategies is likely to be necessary.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46904,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11059834/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17446295231154119\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17446295231154119","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在临床决策中,偏见的影响是不可避免的,而心理健康评估似乎尤其容易受到影响。智障人士并发精神障碍的风险更高。由于智障人士本身存在的困难,对他们进行心理健康评估时往往需要采用一套不同的策略,而这些策略会如何影响偏差风险,目前尚不清楚。在这篇理论性论文中,我们将最新的临床决策偏差概念应用于智障人士精神健康评估中的具体挑战和策略。我们认为,这些评估中的临床决策特别容易受到偏见的影响,其中包括普通人群心理健康评估中存在的偏见来源,以及该人群评估中可能特有的潜在偏见来源。因此,为了控制潜在的偏差,有必要对来自多信息、多方法、跨学科评估策略的信息进行三角测量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Bias in assessment of co-occurring mental disorder in individuals with intellectual disabilities: Theoretical perspectives and implications for clinical practice.

Influence from bias is unavoidable in clinical decision-making, and mental health assessment seems particularly vulnerable. Individuals with intellectual disabilities have increased risk of developing co-occurring mental disorder. Due to the inherent difficulties associated with intellectual disabilities, assessment of mental health in this population often relies on a different set of strategies, and it is unclear how these may affect risk of bias. In this theoretical paper, we apply recent conceptualisations of bias in clinical decision-making to the specific challenges and strategies in mental health assessment in intellectual disabilities. We suggest that clinical decision-making in these assessments is particularly vulnerable to bias, including sources of bias present in mental health assessment in the general population, as well as potential sources of bias which may be specific to assessments in this population. It follows that to manage potential bias, triangulating information from multi-informant, multi-method, interdisciplinary assessment strategies is likely to be necessary.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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