Effectiveness of Psychosocial Interventions for Youth With Mild Intellectual Disabilities or Borderline Intellectual Functioning and Externalising Problems: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.1 2区医学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research Pub Date : 2025-07-14 DOI:10.1111/jir.70014

Eva Kühl, Ina M Koning, Maja Deković, Sander Thomaes, Juliëtte M Liber

{"title":"Effectiveness of Psychosocial Interventions for Youth With Mild Intellectual Disabilities or Borderline Intellectual Functioning and Externalising Problems: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Eva Kühl, Ina M Koning, Maja Deković, Sander Thomaes, Juliëtte M Liber","doi":"10.1111/jir.70014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: This meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for youth with mild intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning (MID-BIF) and externalising problems.Methods: We assessed 2221 studies for eligibility and included seven studies containing 14 effect sizes. We used a multilevel modelling approach to analyse the data and calculated two different types of effect sizes: one for controlled trials and one for intervention pre-test to post-test effects (across all studies).Results: Both controlled trial effect sizes (g = 0.49) and pre-test to post-test effect sizes were significant (g = 0.53). We were unable to detect heterogeneity of effects because of the small number of eligible studies. The risk of bias was generally high.Discussion: Results suggest that psychosocial interventions decrease externalising problems among youth with MID-BIF. Effect sizes appear similar to those for youth without MID-BIF. We discuss recommendations for how the field can move forward.","PeriodicalId":16163,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.70014","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

Objectives: This meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for youth with mild intellectual disabilities or borderline intellectual functioning (MID-BIF) and externalising problems.

Methods: We assessed 2221 studies for eligibility and included seven studies containing 14 effect sizes. We used a multilevel modelling approach to analyse the data and calculated two different types of effect sizes: one for controlled trials and one for intervention pre-test to post-test effects (across all studies).

Results: Both controlled trial effect sizes (g = 0.49) and pre-test to post-test effect sizes were significant (g = 0.53). We were unable to detect heterogeneity of effects because of the small number of eligible studies. The risk of bias was generally high.

Discussion: Results suggest that psychosocial interventions decrease externalising problems among youth with MID-BIF. Effect sizes appear similar to those for youth without MID-BIF. We discuss recommendations for how the field can move forward.

查看原文本刊更多论文

心理社会干预对青少年轻度智障或边缘性智障及外化问题的有效性：一项多水平元分析。

目的：本荟萃分析检验了心理社会干预对轻度智力残疾或边缘性智力功能（MID-BIF）和外化问题青年的有效性。方法：我们评估了2221项研究的合格性，包括7项研究，包含14个效应量。我们使用多层次建模方法来分析数据，并计算了两种不同类型的效应量：一种用于对照试验，另一种用于干预前测试到后测试效应（所有研究）。结果：对照试验效应量（g = 0.49）和前测对后测效应量均显著（g = 0.53）。由于符合条件的研究数量较少，我们无法检测效果的异质性。偏倚的风险普遍较高。讨论：结果表明心理社会干预减少了中期bif青少年的外化问题。效应大小与没有中等bif的年轻人相似。我们讨论了该领域如何向前发展的建议。

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

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research Multiple-

CiteScore

5.60

自引率

5.60%

发文量

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.