MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214591795 · doi:10.1111/jppi.12412

The mental health and well‐being of adults with intellectual disability during the<scp>COVID</scp>‐19 pandemic: A narrative review

2022· review· en· W4214591795 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicMental healthIntellectual disabilityNarrativeSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakPsychologyGerontologyPsychiatryMedicineVirologyLinguisticsInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior to the start of the pandemic, adults with intellectual disability (ID) were more likely to experience mental health difficulties and face barriers obtaining mental health care. COVID-related public health restrictions, combined with heightened challenges to obtain timely mental health care, have served to worsen this situation internationally, with a combination of new onset conditions and worsening mental health for those already struggling. In this narrative review, we summarize literature on the mental health of adults with ID during the COVID-19 pandemic to describe what is known based on clinician perceptions, existing administrative health data, family and staff perceptions, and self-report. In addition to noting similarities and differences in findings based on the source of information, we also explored how experiences differed depending on where and when the research was conducted. Based primarily on research conducted during the first six months of the pandemic, there is a consistent finding across sources of increased anxiety, stress, and isolation. This review also explored the delivery of virtual mental health care and the impact of pandemic-based mental health interventions. There have been very few research studies evaluating clinical care during this time but clinicians have managed to provide supports virtually, which has been evaluated positively by some individuals. This narrative review concludes by identifying gaps in the literature and suggests key directions for future mental health research, policy, and practice efforts. Any mental health efforts now and during pandemic recovery need to have an understanding of how the mental health needs and services for adults with ID have evolved over the course of the pandemic. Further research is needed on the impact of both clinical interventions and other nonclinical efforts on the mental health of people with ID.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.156
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.156
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.363 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it