最近可用于支持成人智力障碍心理治疗的临床措施综述

Thom Gourley, L. Yates
{"title":"最近可用于支持成人智力障碍心理治疗的临床措施综述","authors":"Thom Gourley, L. Yates","doi":"10.1108/amhid-01-2022-0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nPsychometrically sound measures are essential for clinical practice to provide appropriate therapeutic input. Vlissides et al. (2016) reviewed measures used in psychological therapies with people who have intellectual disabilities (ID). This paper aims to review the evidence for the psychometric properties of recent clinical measures published since/overlooked by Vlissides et al. (2016).\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA literature search was conducted to identify relevant clinical measures. Experts in the field also were contacted. Twenty papers were identified, relating to five novel clinical measures: psychological therapies outcome scale – intellectual disabilities, clinical outcome in routine evaluation – learning disabilities scale 30, quality of early relatedness rating scale, scale of emotional development – short and the Frankish assessment of the impact of trauma.\n\n\nFindings\nEvidence was found supporting a proportion of the psychometric properties of each measure, and some measures were found to be useful in directing interventions and informing clinical decisions. None of the measures identified, however, are yet to be fully psychometrically investigated, requiring further research.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to review the evidence of psychometric properties for these five emerging clinical measures and as such contributes an original perspective on their current state and requirements for future development.\n","PeriodicalId":44693,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A review of recent clinical measures that can be used to support psychological therapies with adults with intellectual disabilities\",\"authors\":\"Thom Gourley, L. Yates\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/amhid-01-2022-0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nPsychometrically sound measures are essential for clinical practice to provide appropriate therapeutic input. Vlissides et al. (2016) reviewed measures used in psychological therapies with people who have intellectual disabilities (ID). This paper aims to review the evidence for the psychometric properties of recent clinical measures published since/overlooked by Vlissides et al. (2016).\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nA literature search was conducted to identify relevant clinical measures. Experts in the field also were contacted. Twenty papers were identified, relating to five novel clinical measures: psychological therapies outcome scale – intellectual disabilities, clinical outcome in routine evaluation – learning disabilities scale 30, quality of early relatedness rating scale, scale of emotional development – short and the Frankish assessment of the impact of trauma.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nEvidence was found supporting a proportion of the psychometric properties of each measure, and some measures were found to be useful in directing interventions and informing clinical decisions. None of the measures identified, however, are yet to be fully psychometrically investigated, requiring further research.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to review the evidence of psychometric properties for these five emerging clinical measures and as such contributes an original perspective on their current state and requirements for future development.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":44693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/amhid-01-2022-0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/amhid-01-2022-0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的心理测量学上合理的措施是临床实践中提供适当治疗输入的必要条件。Vlissides等人(2016)回顾了对智障人士(ID)进行心理治疗时使用的措施。本文旨在回顾自Vlissides et al.(2016)以来发表/被忽视的近期临床测量的心理测量特性的证据。设计/方法学/方法进行文献检索以确定相关的临床措施。还联系了该领域的专家。20篇论文被确定,涉及5种新的临床测量:心理治疗结果量表-智力障碍,常规评估临床结果-学习障碍量表30,早期关系质量评定量表,情感发展量表-短和创伤影响的法兰克评估。发现证据支持每个测量的一定比例的心理测量特性,并且发现一些测量在指导干预和告知临床决策方面是有用的。然而,所确定的措施尚未得到充分的心理测量学调查,需要进一步的研究。原创性/价值据作者所知,本文是第一个回顾这五种新兴临床测量方法的心理测量特性的证据,因此对它们的现状和未来发展的要求提供了一个原创的视角。
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
A review of recent clinical measures that can be used to support psychological therapies with adults with intellectual disabilities
Purpose Psychometrically sound measures are essential for clinical practice to provide appropriate therapeutic input. Vlissides et al. (2016) reviewed measures used in psychological therapies with people who have intellectual disabilities (ID). This paper aims to review the evidence for the psychometric properties of recent clinical measures published since/overlooked by Vlissides et al. (2016). Design/methodology/approach A literature search was conducted to identify relevant clinical measures. Experts in the field also were contacted. Twenty papers were identified, relating to five novel clinical measures: psychological therapies outcome scale – intellectual disabilities, clinical outcome in routine evaluation – learning disabilities scale 30, quality of early relatedness rating scale, scale of emotional development – short and the Frankish assessment of the impact of trauma. Findings Evidence was found supporting a proportion of the psychometric properties of each measure, and some measures were found to be useful in directing interventions and informing clinical decisions. None of the measures identified, however, are yet to be fully psychometrically investigated, requiring further research. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to review the evidence of psychometric properties for these five emerging clinical measures and as such contributes an original perspective on their current state and requirements for future development.
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
1.60
自引率
18.20%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
Kind minds: using the ‘compassionate kitbag’ in a compassion focused therapy group for adults with intellectual disabilities To say (sexual fetish)… or not to say (sexual fetish). That is the question Assessing adherence to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence dementia assessment and diagnosis guidelines in adults with intellectual disability: a retrospective cohort study Project ECHO-AIDD: recommendations for care of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities Forensic mental health intellectual and developmental disability service: an analysis of referral patterns and comparison with community mental health intellectual disability (MHID) services in Ireland
×
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