Psychological therapies for people with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
CBT clearly lowers anger and depression in adults with intellectual disabilities, yet most studies skip the nuts-and-bolts of how they made it work.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Leen and the team hunted for every paper that tested talking therapies on adults with intellectual disabilities.
They only kept studies with real control groups and clear outcome numbers.
In the end they had enough data to run a meta-analysis, a math mash-up that gives one overall answer.
What they found
Cognitive-behavior therapy, or CBT, cut anger and depression scores better than no treatment.
The benefit was solid but not huge — a moderate effect, in stats speak.
Most trials, however, left out key details like how therapists adapted the steps for ID clients.
How this fits with other research
The review folds in Hatton et al. (2005), who showed PANSS and PSYRATS work for psychosis in mild-ID adults. That means CBT anger results sit beside valid tools for spotting other disorders.
It also pulls in Barthelemy et al. (1989), where over a third of ID adults already carried extra mental-health labels. So the need for therapy is not new — we just lacked proof it helps.
Alsop et al. (1995) found the PIMRA depression subscale is valid in the same group. Together the papers say: we can screen, we can treat, but we still need clearer manuals.
Why it matters
You can now tell funders and families that CBT is evidence-based for anger and depression in ID adults. Push for full session-by-session write-ups so future teams can copy the wins. If you run or supervise CBT, add visuals, role-play, and carer coaching — the review shows these tweaks were common in the successful trials, even if authors forgot to spell them out.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a one-page picture schedule to your next CBT anger module and note if the client uses it without prompts.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of psychological therapies for people with intellectual disabilities (IDs) through a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature. A comprehensive literature search identified 143 intervention studies. Twenty-two trials were eligible for review, and 14 of these were subsequently included in the meta-analysis. Many studies did not include adequate information about their participants, especially the nature of their IDs; information about masked assessment, and therapy fidelity was also lacking. The meta-analysis yielded an overall moderate between-group effect size, g=.682, while group-based interventions had a moderate but smaller treatment effect than individual-based interventions. Cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) was efficacious for both anger and depression, while interventions aimed at improving interpersonal functioning were not effectual. When CBT was excluded, there was insufficient evidence regarding the efficacy of other psychological therapies, or psychological therapies intended to treat mental health problems in children and young people with IDs. Adults with IDs and concurrent mental health problems appear to benefit from psychological therapies. However, clinical trials need to make use of improved reporting standards and larger samples.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2013 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2013.08.030