School of Psychology, Ulster University, Coleraine, Northern Ireland.
School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Int J Popul Data Sci. 2021 Jan 28;6(1):1342. doi: 10.23889/ijpds.v6i1.1342.
Variability in prevalence estimation of intellectual disability has been attributed to heterogeneity in study settings, methodologies, and intellectual disability case definitions. Among studies based on national household survey data specifically, variability in prevalence estimation has partly been attributed to the level of specificity of the survey questions employed to determine the presence of intellectual disability.
SPECIFIC AIMS & METHOD: Using standardised difference scoring, and 'intellectual disability' survey data from the 2007 Northern Ireland Survey on Activity Limitation and Disability (NISALD) (N=23,689) and the 2011 Northern Ireland Census (N=1,770,217) the following study had two aims. First, we aimed to demonstrate the effects of survey question specificity on intellectual disability prevalence estimation. Second, we aimed to produce reliable estimates of the geographic variation of intellectual disability within private households in Northern Ireland while also assessing the socio-demographic, health-related and disability characteristics of this population.
Prevalence estimates generated using the more crudely classified intellectual disability Census data indicated a prevalence of 2% for the overall population, 3.8% for children aged between 0 and 15 years, and 1.5% for citizens aged 16 years or older. Intellectual disability prevalence estimates generated using the more explicitly defined 2007 NISALD data indicated a population prevalence of 0.5% for the overall population, 1.3% for children aged between 0 and 15 years, and 0.3% for citizens aged 16 years or older. The NISALD estimates were consistent with most recent international meta-analysis prevalence estimates. According to the NISALD data, the majority of those with an intellectual disability were male, lived outside Belfast, and experienced severe intellectual disability, with multiple comorbid health conditions.
The current findings highlight the importance of survey question specificity in the estimation of intellectual disability prevalence and provide reliable prevalence estimates of intellectual disability in Northern Ireland. The findings also demonstrate the utility of administrative data for detecting and understanding intellectual disability, and inform recommendations on how to maximise use of future intellectual disability Census data.
智力障碍患病率的估计存在差异，这归因于研究环境、方法和智力障碍病例定义的异质性。在专门基于全国家庭调查数据的研究中，患病率估计的差异部分归因于用于确定智力障碍存在的调查问题的特异性水平。
使用标准化差异评分，以及 2007 年北爱尔兰活动限制和残疾调查（NISALD）（N=23689）和 2011 年北爱尔兰普查（N=1770217）的“智力障碍”调查数据，本研究有两个目的。首先，我们旨在展示调查问题特异性对智力障碍患病率估计的影响。其次，我们旨在在北爱尔兰私人家庭内生成智力障碍的可靠地理变异估计值，同时评估该人群的社会人口统计学、健康相关和残疾特征。
使用更粗略分类的智力障碍普查数据生成的患病率估计表明，总人口的患病率为 2%，0 至 15 岁儿童的患病率为 3.8%，16 岁及以上公民的患病率为 1.5%。使用更明确界定的 2007 NISALD 数据生成的智力障碍患病率估计表明，总人口的患病率为 0.5%，0 至 15 岁儿童的患病率为 1.3%，16 岁及以上公民的患病率为 0.3%。NISALD 的估计值与最近的国际荟萃分析患病率估计值一致。根据 NISALD 数据，大多数智力障碍患者为男性，居住在贝尔法斯特以外的地区，且患有严重的智力障碍，同时伴有多种合并症。
目前的研究结果强调了调查问题特异性在智力障碍患病率估计中的重要性，并为北爱尔兰的智力障碍提供了可靠的患病率估计。研究结果还表明，行政数据可用于发现和理解智力障碍，并就如何最大限度地利用未来的智力障碍普查数据提出建议。
