Family network typologies of adults with intellectual disability: Associations with psychological outcomes.
Tess Tournier, Alexander H C Hendriks, Andrew Jahoda and 4 others
PMID 32710673WHAT IT FOUND
Adults with intellectual disabilities living in supported accommodation fall into four distinct family network types.
Those with the smallest, least supportive networks reported the lowest satisfaction with personal relationships and community, yet also displayed the fewest behavioural problems.
Key findings
01Four distinct family network typologies were identified among adults with mild intellectual disabilities, ranging from small and impoverished networks to large but distant ones.
02Participants in the class with the smallest networks (Class 1) were the least satisfied with their personal relationships and community connectedness, but displayed the lowest levels of behavioural and emotional problems.
03Participants in the class with moderate-sized, highly reciprocal networks (Class 3) reported the highest well-being in personal relationships but also scored highest on rule-breaking and intrusive behaviour.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
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 sample was highly selective, including only those living away from family in supported accommodation. This excludes adults with intellectual disabilities living with their families, so the findings may not apply to them. Only 42.4% of those invited participated, and no data were available on non-respondents, raising concerns about representativeness. The study focused only on emotional support, ignoring instrumental support (e.g., help with tasks), which may be more relevant for some outcomes. The study is cross-sectional, so it cannot determine whether family network type causes well-being differences or if behavioural problems influence family relationships. Some classes, particularly Class 4 (n=9), had very small sample sizes, making the findings for these groups unstable.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that a larger family network equals better well-being or fewer behavioural problems. The study found that the group with the most supportive and reciprocal networks (Class 3) had the highest levels of rule-breaking behaviour, while the group with the smallest, least supportive networks (Class 1) had the fewest behavioural problems.