Exploring the social care-related quality of life outcomes of adults with intellectual disabilities through the use of Talking Mats®.
Cathy Darvell, Jill Bradshaw
PMID 36124783WHAT IT FOUND
Talking Mats helped most adults with intellectual disabilities report high satisfaction with care, especially housing and safety.
Participants struggled with abstract questions about time spent in activities. The visual format allowed some to express dissatisfaction that they might otherwise have hidden.
Key findings
01Participants reported high general satisfaction with social care, placing 85.6% of items positively on average.
02Satisfaction was highest for accommodation (93.4% positive) and safety (90.5% positive), but lower for occupation (75.3% positive).
03Participants found it difficult to understand and respond to abstract concepts regarding time spent in activities and amounts, limiting the reliability of responses in these areas.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was exploratory and qualitative, so it cannot prove that Talking Mats improve outcomes or accuracy compared to other methods. Only 15 of the 21 recruited participants were able to communicate effectively enough to be included, limiting generalisability to those with more severe communication difficulties. Inter-rater reliability for assessing communication effectiveness was poor on the detailed scale (Kappa 0.2), though agreement on whether communication was sufficient was 100%. Both authors are licensed trainers or associates for Talking Mats, which may influence the design, interpretation, or promotion of the tool's benefits. Participants struggled with abstract concepts like frequency and duration, meaning satisfaction ratings for occupation and leisure may not accurately reflect their actual experience or preferences.
Declared interests
Both authors are Licensed Trainers for Talking Mats, and one author is the Honorary Research Associate for Talking Mats.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that the high satisfaction scores reported by participants accurately reflect their true feelings about all aspects of their care. The study found that participants struggled significantly with abstract questions about time spent in activities and amounts, leading to unreliable responses in those domains. Additionally, the authors have a direct financial and professional interest in the Talking Mats tool, which may bias the interpretation of the method's effectiveness.