National disability registers report on causes of intellectual disability in Taiwan: 2000-2007.

Lin et al. (2009) looked at Taiwan’s national disability registry. They tracked what doctors listed as the cause of intellectual disability from 2000 to 2007.

The team counted how many cases were labeled “congenital” versus “disease-related.” They wanted to see if the mix of causes was changing over time.

Congenital causes dropped among registered cases. Disease-related causes edged up a little.

In the whole population both types rose slightly, but the shift inside the registry pushed the authors to say Taiwan’s cause codes need an update.

Konstantareas et al. (1999) built a tree-shaped ICD-10 map for Finland 10 years earlier. Their ready-made labels could answer Taiwan’s 2009 call for better categories.

Fahmie et al. (2013) went further than the registry. They followed Utah babies from birth and still saw socioeconomic risk after removing genetic cases. The birth-cohort design adds depth to Taiwan’s snapshot.

Tassé et al. (2013) supplied the fix Taiwan wanted. Their AAIDD position paper gave ICD-11 new terms for intellectual disability, directly updating the old codes Taiwan found lacking.

If you write eval reports or sit on diagnostic teams, know that cause labels are shifting. Use the newer ICD-11 terms from Tassé et al. (2013) and borrow the Finnish tree if you need clear, parent-friendly explanations. Updating your intake forms now keeps your files in line with tomorrow’s registry standards.