Epidemiological issues in mental retardation

Current Opinion in Psychiatry

Volumn 9, Issue 5, 1996, Pages 305-311

  Haveman, Meindert J ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FRAGILE X SYNDROME; HEALTH CARE NEED; HUMAN; MENTAL DEFICIENCY; MENTAL DISEASE; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE; REVIEW; SCREENING; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT;

EID: 0029773631     PISSN: 09517367     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00001504-199609000-00002     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Fraser WI: A medical research council initiative in mental handicap. Br J Psychiatry 1995, 166:703-704.
2. Fernald CD: When in London ...: differences in disability language preferences among English-speaking countries. Ment Retard 1995, 33: 99-103.
3. Kaufman AS, Ishikuma T, Kaufman-Packer JL: Amazingly short forms of WAIS-R. J Psychoeducational Assess 1991, 9:4-15.
4. Nagle RJ, Bell NL: Clinical utility of Kaufman's 'amazingly' short forms of the WAIS-R with educable mentally retarded adolescents. J Clin Psychol 1995, 51:396-400. The authors investigated the comparability between three 'amazingly' short forms of the Wehsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised suggested by Kaufman et al. [3] and the complete battery among a sample of 114 adolescents with mild intellectual disability.
5. Hogg J, Moss S: The applicability of the Kaufman's Assessment Battery for children (K-ABC) with older adults (50+ years) with moderate, severe and profound intellectual impairment. J Intellect Disability Res 1995, 39:167-176.
6. Seltzer MM, Krauss MW, Walsh P, Conliffe C, Larson B, Birkbeck G, Hong J, Choi SC: Cross-national comparisons of ageing mothers of adults with intellectual disabilities. J Intellect Disability Res 1995, 39:408-418.
7. Reid AH, Ballinger BR: Behaviour symptoms among severely and profoundly mentally retarded patients; a 16-18 year follow-up study. Br J Psychiatry 1995, 167:452-455. Abnormal behaviour symptoms and patterns were studied in 100 severely and profoundly intellectually disabled adults.
8. Matson JI: The PIMRA manual. Louisiana State University. New Orleans: International Diagnostic Systems, Inc.; 1988.
9. Reiss S: Reiss screen for maladaptive behaviour test manual. University of Illinois at Chicago. Chicago: International Diagnostic Systems, Inc.; 1988.
10. Sturmey P, Burcham KJ, Perkins TS: The Reiss Screen for maladaptive behaviour: its reliability and internal consistencies, J Intellect Disability Res 1995, 39:191-195.
11. Sturmey P: DSM-III-R and persons with dual diagnoses: conceptual issues and strategies for future research. J Intellect Disability Res 1995, 39:357-364.
12. Farmer R, Rohde J, Bonsall C, Emami J: Towards the development of a multi-axial classification of people with learning difficulties. J Intellect Disability Res 1994, 38:587-597.
13. Lowe K, Felce D: How do carers assess the severity of challenging behaviour? A total population study. J Intellect Disability Res 1995, 39:117-127. A study of the severity of management problems of 13 types of problem behaviour presented by a total population sample of 161 individuals with intellectual disability, as reported by their primary carers at eight separate assessments over 5 years.
14. Wehmeyer ML, Metzler CA: How self-determined are people with mental retardation? The National Consumer Survey. Mental Retard 1995, 33:111-119.
15. Poling A, le Sage M: Evaluating psychotropic drugs in people with mental retardation: where are the social validity data? Am J Ment Retard 1995, 100:193-200. A survey of articles published between 1987 and 1993 in five major journals revealed that none of the 68 articles concerned with the psychopharmacology of intellectual disability reported social validity data.
16. Nadarajah J, Roy A, Harris TO, Corbett JA: Methodological aspects of life events research in people with learning disabilities: a review and initial findings. J Intellect Disability Res 1995, 39:47-56.
17. Murphy CC, Yeargin-Allsopp M, Decouflé P, Drews CD: The administrative prevalence of mental retardation in 10-year old children in metropolitan Atlanta, 1985 through 1987. Am J Pub Health 1995, 85:319-323.
18. Yeargin-Allsopp M, Drews CD, Decouflé P, Murphy CC: Mild mental retardation in black and white children in metropolitan Atlanta: a case-control study. Am J Pub Health 1995, 85:324-328.
19. Drews CD, Yeargin-Allsopp M, Decouflé P, Murphy CC: Variation in the influence of selected sociodemographic risk factors for mental retardation. Am J Pub Health 1995, 85:329-334.
20. Blair C, Ramey CT, Hardin JM: Early intervention for low birthweight, premature infants: participation and Intellectual development. Am J Ment Retard 1995, 99:542-554. The Infant Health and Development Program was an eight-site randomized controlled trial of comprehensive early intervention for low birthweight, premature infants during the first 3 years of life in which intellectual development was an outcome of major importance. The typical infant enrolled in this study weighed 1800g and was of 33 weeks gestational age. There were 377 infants in the intervention group and 608 in the follow-up (control) group.
21. Zigler E: Can we 'cure' mild mental retardation among individuals in the lower socioeconomic stratum? [Editorial]. Am J Pub Health 1995, 85:302-304.
22. Shepperdson B: Two longitudinal studies of the abilities of people with Down's syndrome. J Intellect Disability Res 1995, 39:419-431.
23. Burt DB, Loveland KA, Chen YW, Chuang A, Lewis KR, Cherry L: Aging in adults with Down syndrome: report from a longitudinal study. Am J Ment Retard 1995, 100:262-270.
24. Chicoine B, McGuire D, Hebein S, Gilly D: Use of community-oriented primary care model for a special-needs population: a clinic for adults with Down syndrome. Am J Pub Health 1995, 85:869-870.
25. Puri BK, Lekh SK, Langa A, Zaman R, Singh I: Mortality in a hospitalized mentally handicapped population: a 10-year survey. J Intellect Disability Res 1995, 39:442-446.
26. Willemsen R, Mohkamsing S, De Vries B, Devys D, Van den Ouweland A, Mandel JL, Galjaard H, Oostra B: Rapid antibody test for fragile X syndrome. Lancet 1995, 345:1147-1148. Identification of sufferers and carriers of fragile X syndrome is usually done with a DNA test system; the authors developed a rapid antibody to identify fragile X patients. This noninvasive test requires one or two drops of blood. The authors suggested that it can be used for screening large groups of intellectually disabled individuals and neonates.
27. Wilson JHG, Jungner G: Principles and practice of screening for disease. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1968.
28. Park V: American College of Medical Genetics policy statement. Fragile X syndrome: diagnostic and carrier testing. Am J Med Genet 1994, 53: 380-381.
29. Howard-Peebles PN, Maddalena A, Spence WC, Levinson G, Fallon L, Bick DP, Black SH, Schulman JD: Fragile X screening: what is the real issue? [Letter] Am J Med Genet 1994, 53:382.
30. Laxova R: Fragile X screening: what is the real issue? [Comment] Am J Med Genet 1995, 57:508-509.
31. Hietala M, Hakonen A, Aro AR, Niemela P, Peltonen L, Aula P: Attitudes toward genetic testing among the general population and relatives of patients with a severe genetic disease: a survey from Finland. Am J Hum Genet 1995, 56:1493-1500.
32. Thornton JG, Hewison J, Lilford RJ, Vail A: A randomised trial of three methods of giving information about prenatal testing. B M J 1995, 311:1127-1130. A randomized trial of three methods of information dispersal about prenatal testing to 1691 women booking antenatal care before 15 weeks' gestation. All participants received the usual information about prenatal tests from hospital staff. Individual participants were offered a separate session with a research midwife in which prenatal screening was described in detail. Class participants were offered the same extra information in an early prenatal class.
33. Fletcher J, Hicks NR, Kay JDS, Boyd PA: Using decision analysis to compare policies for antenatal screening for Down's syndrome. B M J 1995, 311:351-356. To compare different screening policies for Down syndrome across a broad range of outcomes, a decision tree was used to compare data from local sources with the medical literature to predict the likely frequency of several outcomes. Sensitivity analyses were used to test the robustness of the conclusions drawn.
34. Halliday J, Lumley J, Watson L: Comparison of women who do and do not have amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling. Lancet 1995, 345: 704-709.