SLPOtherJournal of intellectual disability research : JIDR2025

Psychometric Properties of the Nine-Item Personal Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) Seven-Item Generalised Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), and the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) With People With Intellectual Disabilities.

Dave Dagnan, Rob Saunders, Joshua Stott and 2 others

PMID 40098282

WHAT IT FOUND

Brief mental health questionnaires worked well for people with intellectual disabilities in therapy services.

Scores were reliable and matched patterns seen in the general population, supporting their use without changing the questions.

Key findings

01The depression, anxiety, and adjustment scales all showed good internal reliability when used with people with intellectual disabilities.

02The structure of the anxiety and depression scales was similar to that found in people without intellectual disabilities.

03The four-item Work and Social Adjustment Scale demonstrated a good single-factor fit and reliability.

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.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The sample size was small (between 124 and 133 participants depending on the scale), which increases the risk of statistical model errors. The participants likely had mild intellectual disabilities, so results may not apply to those with more severe disabilities. Data on how the questionnaires were administered (e.g., online, face-to-face, with support) was not recorded. The WSAS was analysed as a four-item measure because the work item was not applicable to most participants.

Declared interests

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume these scales are validated for all levels of intellectual disability. The study only included people accessing standard therapy services, who likely had mild disabilities, and did not test whether the scales work equally well for those with severe disabilities or complex communication needs.

Read it on PubMed →