Evaluating implementation outcomes of a measure of social vulnerability in adults with intellectual disabilities.
Staff may like an ID tool yet still give it wrong—check fidelity first.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Tabin et al. (2021) watched how staff used the TV-22 scale. This tool measures social risk in adults with intellectual disability.
They asked workers what they thought of the tool. They also checked if staff followed the test steps.
What they found
Workers said the TV-22 looked fine and easy. Yet most skipped steps when giving it.
Psychologists followed the rules more than other staff. Fidelity was low overall.
How this fits with other research
Ricciardi et al. (2020) found staff love behavior data sheets. Mireille shows liking a tool does not mean using it right.
Vassos et al. (2023) reviewed mental-health tools for adults with ID. Only four tools had solid data. TV-22 was not on that short list, so low fidelity may hide here.
Hronis et al. (2018) showed clinicians feel shaky when testing clients with ID. Low TV-22 fidelity matches that lack of skill.
Why it matters
A good scale is useless if staff skip half the items. Before you adopt any ID tool, run a quick fidelity check. Pick two clients, watch the next assessment, score a simple yes-no checklist for each step. Share results at the next team meeting and retrain on missed steps. Repeat monthly until staff hit 90% correct.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Shadow one TV-22 session with a fidelity checklist and retrain on missed steps.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: A test identified as valid and accurate in research will not automatically be considered appropriate by those involved in its use, or even be used in the first place. The Social Vulnerability Test-22 items [TV-22] is a measure specially designed for adults with intellectual disabilities (ID). This study aims to evaluate the implementation outcomes of the TV-22; more precisely its acceptability (e.g., complexity), appropriateness (e.g., perceived relevance) and the assessment fidelity (i.e., adherence to assessment guidelines) by special education practitioners. PROCEDURES: Thirty-one practitioners (8 psychologists, 11 educators, 12 special education center managers) administered the TV-22 during an interview with an adult with ID. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect practitioners' opinions on the acceptability and the appropriateness of the TV-22 for their clinical practice. Quantitative analyses were performed to assess the fidelity of the assessments and the influence of some personal factors. RESULTS: The results indicate a good appropriateness, a reasonable acceptability, - but a low assessment fidelity of the TV-22 by some practitioners. Psychologists stand out for a more rigorous use of the test. IMPLICATIONS: Results highlight the importance of evaluating implementation outcomes when a new measure is developed to ensure its appropriateness and correct use by stakeholders.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2021 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2021.104111