MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Behavioural and cognitive-behavioural interventions for outwardly-directed aggressive behaviour in people with learning disabilities

2004· reference-entry· en· W4235223424 on OpenAlexaff
Angela Hassiotis, Ian Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2004
Typereference-entry
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsLearning Partnership
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOCINAHLPsychological interventionLearning disabilityPsychologyClinical psychologyMEDLINECognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Outwardly directed aggressive behaviour is a significant part of problem behaviours presented by people with learning disabilities. Prevalence rates between 3.3% to 36% have been reported in the literature. Such behaviours run a long term course and are a major cause of social exclusion OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of behavioural and cognitive behavioural interventions for outwardly-directed aggressive behaviour for people with learning disabilities. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC and PsycINFO were searched using a strategy combining (Learning or synonyms) and (Disabilities or synonyms) and (Behaviour or synonyms) and (treatment or synonyms) to late 2002. Where appropriate, research filters were used. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were selected if more than 4 participants, children or adults, were allocated by random or quasi-random methods to either intervention or standard treatment/wait list. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: References identified by electronic searches, examinations of bibliography and personal contacts were screened against inclusion criteria by two independent reviewers. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies based on adult populations with learning disabilities were deemed to be suitable for inclusion but data were only available in a form suitable for meta-analysis in two studies. Direct interventions based on cognitive-behavioural methods (modified relaxation, assertiveness training with problem solving, and anger management) appear to have some impact on reduction of aggressive behaviour at the end of treatment but not at follow up (up to six months) as rated by individuals and their carers. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: The existing evidence on the efficacy of cognitive behavioural and behavioural interventions on outwards directed aggression in children and adults with ID is scant. There is a paucity of methodologically sound clinical trials. Given the impact of such behaviours on the affected individual, his or her carers and on service providers, effective interventions are essential. It is also important to investigate cost efficacy of treatment models against existing treatments. We recommend that randomised controlled trials of sufficient power are carried out using primary outcomes of reduction in outward directed aggression, improvement in quality of life and cost efficacy as measured by standardised scales.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207