Psychological eHealth interventions for people with intellectual disabilities: A scoping review.
Cathelijn E M Oudshoorn, Noud Frielink, Sara L P Nijs and 1 others
PMID 33704872WHAT IT FOUND
Most studies used wearable sensors to prompt adaptive behaviour in people with severe disabilities.
Only two trials tested remote video coaching for parents. No study delivered therapy directly to adults via video. Evidence is mostly single-case, so effectiveness remains unproven.
Key findings
01The review included 33 studies with 168 participants, but 29 used single-case designs and only one was a randomized controlled trial.
02Twenty-two studies relied on sensor technology to detect target behaviours and trigger stimuli, mostly for people with severe to profound intellectual disabilities.
03Only two studies used telehealth to coach parents delivering interventions at home, and no studies delivered psychological interventions directly to people with intellectual disabilities via video conferencing.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat 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
No quality appraisal was performed, so the risk of bias in the 33 included studies is unknown. The evidence is overwhelmingly from single-case designs (29 of 33 studies), which cannot establish generalizable effectiveness. Only one randomized controlled trial was included, limiting conclusions about what works. The search was restricted to English-language publications, potentially missing relevant studies. The definition of 'eHealth' was broad and inconsistently applied across studies, making comparisons difficult. Most studies were conducted by two Italian research groups, limiting geographic and cultural generalizability.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume these interventions are effective. The review maps what has been tried, not what works. With 29 of 33 studies using single-case designs and no quality appraisal, the evidence does not support changing clinical practice based on this paper alone.