Loughborough University
Browse
1-s2.0-S2352872916300318-main.pdf (552.32 kB)

A critical literature review of the effectiveness of various instruments in the diagnosis of dementia in adults with intellectual disabilities

Download (552.32 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2017-01-06, 12:09 authored by Jordan Elliott-King, Sarah Shaw, Stephan Bandelow, Rajal Devshi, Shelina Kassam, Eef HogervorstEef Hogervorst
Currently, there is no consensus on dementia diagnostics in adults with intellectual disabilities (ID). There are three types of assessments available: direct cognitive tests, test batteries, and informant reports. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in four databases yielding 9840 records. Relevant studies were identified and selected using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and then coded and classified according to assessment type. This was completed by two independent researchers, with a third consulted when discrepancies arose. The review collates diagnostic instruments and presents strengths and weaknesses. Results Overall 47 studies met the search criteria, and 43 instruments were extracted from the selected studies. Of which, 10 instruments were classified as test batteries, 23 were classified as direct cognitive tests, and the remaining 10 were informant reports. Discussion This review can recommend that cognitive test batteries can offer the most practical and efficient method for dementia diagnosis in individuals with ID.

History

School

  • Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences

Published in

Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring

Volume

4

Pages

126 - 148

Citation

ELLIOTT-KING, J. ... et al., 2016. A critical literature review of the effectiveness of various instruments in the diagnosis of dementia in adults with intellectual disabilities. Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring, 4, pp. 126 - 148.

Publisher

Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the Alzheimer’s Association.

Version

  • VoR (Version of Record)

Publisher statement

This work is made available according to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence. Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Publication date

2016-06-30

Copyright date

2016

Notes

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

eISSN

2352-8729

Language

  • en

Usage metrics

    Loughborough Publications

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC