Search results for ‘Subject term:"learning disabilities"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Evaluation of a psychodynamic psychotherapy service for adults with intellectual disabilities: rationale, design and preliminary outcome data
- Authors:
- BEAIL Nigel, WARDEN Sharon
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 9(3), 1996, pp.223-228.
- Publisher:
- Wiley
The debate concerning the provision of psychotherapy services for people with intellectual disabilities has moved on from issues of 'relevance' through 'equity' to the current issue of 'effectiveness'. The latter is hard to prove from the available research and clinical literature. Reports on preliminary results from an evaluation of a psychodynamic psychotherapy service for adults with intellectual disabilities. Presents the rationale and design, including details of process and outcome measures, and preliminary results. Issues concerning operationalisation of such a study in normal clinical practice are discussed.
Risk assessment: actuarial prediction and clinical judgement of offending incidents and behaviour for intellectual disability services
- Authors:
- LINDSAY William R., BEAIL Nigel
- Journal article citation:
- Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 17(4), December 2004, pp.229-234.
- Publisher:
- Wiley
Research on prediction of violent and sexual offending behaviour has developed considerably in the mainstream criminological literature. Work on actuarial instruments, dynamic variables, clinical judgement and structured clinical judgement is reviewed. A number of studies comparing actuarial instruments in terms of their predictive validity are reviewed. Relative effectiveness and applicability to intellectual disability is considered. A framework for dynamic variables is outlined and the importance of dynamic variables for inclusion in risk prediction is established. Strengths and limitations of clinical judgement are reported and the importance of reliability is noted. Finally, structured clinical judgement is reviewed in terms of the way in which it combines the other three groups of variables. The information regarding different methods of risk assessment is integrated with research and opinion. Risk prediction will always be a judgement and as such there will always be errors in judgement. As clinicians, researchers and policy makers it is our duty to employ the latest research information to make predictions that are as accurate as possible. However, we must also help to promote a culture that can be tolerant of inevitable errors.