A Scoping Review of the Ways Gatekeepers May Hinder or Promote Opportunities for People With Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities to Learn About Research Participation

IF 2.1 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Madison Brodeur, Ariel Schwartz, Katherine McDonald
{"title":"A Scoping Review of the Ways Gatekeepers May Hinder or Promote Opportunities for People With Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities to Learn About Research Participation","authors":"Madison Brodeur,&nbsp;Ariel Schwartz,&nbsp;Katherine McDonald","doi":"10.1111/jir.13216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Adults with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities are disproportionately excluded from participation in research, consequently increasing disparities experienced by this group. Gatekeepers, individuals who control access to research participation opportunities, may either support or pose a barrier to inclusion in research. We sought to understand how gatekeepers serve as supports and barriers to the participation of people with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities in research and the factors that may drive their actions. We also sought to identify approaches to interacting with gatekeepers that promoted the sharing of research participation opportunities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a scoping review of manuscripts published between January 2009 and September 2024 describing gatekeeping during recruitment for adults with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities in social/behavioural research. We conducted content analysis of 22 manuscripts to identify ‘gate opening’ actions (actions that support research participation) and ‘gate closing’ actions (actions that pose a barrier to research participation) at the point of recruitment. We also identified approaches researchers took when interacting with gatekeepers to promote gate opening actions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Gatekeepers' attitudes (e.g., valuing research) and knowledge about prospective participants were associated with gate opening actions. Gatekeepers' attitudes of mistrust of researchers and/or research, deprioritisation of research and presumed incapacity of people with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities to consent to, participate in and/or benefit from research participation were associated with gate closing actions. Gatekeepers' lack of information (e.g., about research and prospective participants) was also associated with gate closing actions. Restrictive organisational policies and gatekeepers' lack of resources (e.g., time) were also associated with gate closing actions. Approaches for interacting with gatekeepers that may foster gate opening actions included: addressing gatekeeper concerns, educating gatekeepers about the benefits of research participation and developing relationships with gatekeepers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>We identified several malleable factors that may drive gate opening and gate closing actions. Enhanced collaboration between researchers and gatekeepers may foster greater opportunities for individuals with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities to learn about research opportunities.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16163,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","volume":"69 5","pages":"329-344"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jir.13216","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jir.13216","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Adults with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities are disproportionately excluded from participation in research, consequently increasing disparities experienced by this group. Gatekeepers, individuals who control access to research participation opportunities, may either support or pose a barrier to inclusion in research. We sought to understand how gatekeepers serve as supports and barriers to the participation of people with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities in research and the factors that may drive their actions. We also sought to identify approaches to interacting with gatekeepers that promoted the sharing of research participation opportunities.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review of manuscripts published between January 2009 and September 2024 describing gatekeeping during recruitment for adults with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities in social/behavioural research. We conducted content analysis of 22 manuscripts to identify ‘gate opening’ actions (actions that support research participation) and ‘gate closing’ actions (actions that pose a barrier to research participation) at the point of recruitment. We also identified approaches researchers took when interacting with gatekeepers to promote gate opening actions.

Results

Gatekeepers' attitudes (e.g., valuing research) and knowledge about prospective participants were associated with gate opening actions. Gatekeepers' attitudes of mistrust of researchers and/or research, deprioritisation of research and presumed incapacity of people with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities to consent to, participate in and/or benefit from research participation were associated with gate closing actions. Gatekeepers' lack of information (e.g., about research and prospective participants) was also associated with gate closing actions. Restrictive organisational policies and gatekeepers' lack of resources (e.g., time) were also associated with gate closing actions. Approaches for interacting with gatekeepers that may foster gate opening actions included: addressing gatekeeper concerns, educating gatekeepers about the benefits of research participation and developing relationships with gatekeepers.

Conclusion

We identified several malleable factors that may drive gate opening and gate closing actions. Enhanced collaboration between researchers and gatekeepers may foster greater opportunities for individuals with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities to learn about research opportunities.

Abstract Image

看门人可能阻碍或促进智力和/或发育障碍者了解研究参与的机会的方式的范围审查。
背景:患有智力和/或发育障碍的成年人被不成比例地排除在研究之外,从而增加了这一群体所经历的差异。把关人,即控制研究参与机会的个人,可能支持或构成纳入研究的障碍。我们试图了解看门人是如何支持和阻碍智力和/或发育障碍人士参与研究的,以及可能推动他们行动的因素。我们还寻求确定与促进研究参与机会共享的看门人互动的方法。方法:我们对2009年1月至2024年9月期间发表的描述在社会/行为研究中招募智力和/或发育障碍成人时把关的手稿进行了范围审查。我们对22篇论文进行了内容分析,以确定在招募时的“开门”行为(支持研究参与的行为)和“关门”行为(对研究参与构成障碍的行为)。我们还确定了研究人员在与看门人互动时采取的方法,以促进大门打开行动。结果:看门人的态度(如重视研究)和对潜在参与者的了解与开门行为有关。看门人对研究人员和/或研究的不信任、对研究的不重视,以及认为智力和/或发育障碍者没有能力同意、参与和/或从研究参与中受益,这些态度与关门行动有关。看门人缺乏信息(例如,关于研究和潜在参与者)也与关门行为有关。限制性组织政策和看门人缺乏资源(如时间)也与关门行动有关。与看门人互动的方法可能会促进门户开放行动,包括:解决看门人关注的问题,教育看门人关于研究参与的好处,以及发展与看门人的关系。结论:我们确定了几个可能驱动闸门开启和关闭动作的延展性因素。加强研究人员和看门人之间的合作,可以为智力和/或发育障碍的个人提供更多的机会来了解研究机会。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
81
期刊介绍: The Journal of Intellectual Disability Research is devoted exclusively to the scientific study of intellectual disability and publishes papers reporting original observations in this field. The subject matter is broad and includes, but is not restricted to, findings from biological, educational, genetic, medical, psychiatric, psychological and sociological studies, and ethical, philosophical, and legal contributions that increase knowledge on the treatment and prevention of intellectual disability and of associated impairments and disabilities, and/or inform public policy and practice. Expert reviews on themes in which recent research has produced notable advances will be included. Such reviews will normally be by invitation.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信