Quality of life predictors for individuals with intellectual disability: Cross-sectional proxy-report data from a multicentre study.
Saved in:
| Title: | Quality of life predictors for individuals with intellectual disability: Cross-sectional proxy-report data from a multicentre study. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Blanco-López, Juan Luis (AUTHOR), Fernández-Lázaro, Diego (AUTHOR), Sánchez-Valdeón, Leticia (AUTHOR), Seco-Calvo, Jesús (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability. Jun2026, Vol. 51 Issue 2, p174-189. 16p. |
| Subjects: | Cross-sectional method, Patient autonomy, Intellect, Ecology, Proxy, Institutional care, Down syndrome, Multiple regression analysis, Mental illness, Residential patterns, Adult day care, Presenteeism (Labor), Health, Questionnaires, Severity of illness index, Mann Whitney U Test, Sensory disorders, Psychological well-being, Age distribution, Intellectual disabilities, Social integration, Quality of life, Research, Research methodology, Medical records, Seizures (Medicine), Epilepsy, Communication, Social support, Needs assessment, Data analysis software, Individual development, Interpersonal relations, Residential care, Psychosocial factors |
| Geographic Terms: | Spain |
| Abstract: | Background: This research investigated quality of life (QoL) predictors in Spanish adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Individuals with high versus low-support intensity levels were compared. Method: In this cross-sectional study, 396 participants were divided into two groups based on support intensity and their QoL was evaluated using validated proxy-report measures (INICO-FEAPS/San Martín). Hierarchical regression analysis was conducted for 19 variables (QoL predictors) relating to personal characteristics, support needs, and environment. Results: Findings demonstrated distinct QoL predictors for the two groups: recorded intellectual disability etiology; mental health status; living environment, adaptive behaviour; and institutionalisation were significant for the low-support intensity group, while adaptive behaviour and behavioural disorders were significant for the high-support intensity group. Conclusion: Different variables affect QoL for low and high-support intensity groups and highlight potential benefits of personalised care based on individual dependency levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Background: This research investigated quality of life (QoL) predictors in Spanish adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Individuals with high versus low-support intensity levels were compared. Method: In this cross-sectional study, 396 participants were divided into two groups based on support intensity and their QoL was evaluated using validated proxy-report measures (INICO-FEAPS/San Martín). Hierarchical regression analysis was conducted for 19 variables (QoL predictors) relating to personal characteristics, support needs, and environment. Results: Findings demonstrated distinct QoL predictors for the two groups: recorded intellectual disability etiology; mental health status; living environment, adaptive behaviour; and institutionalisation were significant for the low-support intensity group, while adaptive behaviour and behavioural disorders were significant for the high-support intensity group. Conclusion: Different variables affect QoL for low and high-support intensity groups and highlight potential benefits of personalised care based on individual dependency levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 13668250 |
| DOI: | 10.3109/13668250.2025.2532918 |
