Sarah Lineberry, Matthew Bogenschutz, and Michael Broda, Virginia Commonwealth University.
Am J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2024 Sep 1;129(5):346-361. doi: 10.1352/1944-7558-129.5.346.
Researchers and advocates have long called for improved research methods that better include people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), but challenges to doing so persist. Proxy responses are frequently used to circumvent some of these challenges, but may not fully capture the perspectives of people with IDD. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the possibility of consequences due to a lack of research about health outcomes for people with IDD, with documented disproportionate impact but little understanding about specific experiences for people with IDD. Using exploratory graph analysis (EGA) we explored the use of proxy responses on the COVID-19 Supplement of the National Core Indicators In-Person Survey. Findings suggest significant differences in response patterns between people who answered independently, via proxy, and with a mix of response types beyond what would be expected due to demographic differences in participants.
研究人员和倡导者长期以来一直呼吁改进研究方法,以更好地纳入智障和发育障碍人士(IDD),但这方面的挑战仍然存在。代理回复经常被用来规避其中的一些挑战,但可能无法完全捕捉到 IDD 人士的观点。COVID-19 大流行凸显了由于缺乏关于 IDD 人士健康结果的研究而可能产生的后果,这些后果已经记录下来,对 IDD 人士的具体经历却知之甚少。使用探索性图形分析(EGA),我们探讨了在全国核心指标现场调查的 COVID-19 补充调查中使用代理回复的情况。研究结果表明,在独立回答、通过代理回答以及混合回答类型的人群之间,存在着显著的反应模式差异,这种差异超出了参与者在人口统计学方面的差异所预期的程度。