4.2 Article

Mental retardation in teenagers: Prevalence data from the Niagara Region, Ontario

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/070674370204700707

关键词

prevalence; developmental disability; intellectual disability; mental retardation; Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: There are few Canadian prevalence studies of mental retardation (MR); those that do exist were conducted prior to the era of community integration. We undertook a population-based study to explore mental health disturbances in young persons with MR. The first requirement was to identify a population with MR and to establish its prevalence. Here, we report data on the prevalence of MR in a population aged 14 to 20 years. Method: We conducted the study in the Niagara Region of Ontario, which has a population base of around 400 000. Researchers worked closely with schools and with agencies providing services to persons with MR to identify the study group. We confirmed the functioning level of participants through standard tests of nonverbal intelligence and receptive language; teachers and other service personnel provided information relevant to the estimation of nonparticipants' functioning level. Results: We identified 255 individuals as having MR (IQ less than or equal to 75). Of these, 171 chose to participate (defined as participants with MR; the remaining 84 were nonparticipants with MR). Thus, the participation rate was 67% (171/255). Participants and nonparticipants with MR did not differ on age, sex, or IQ, although there were more nonparticipants in the lower social strata. Overall prevalence for MR was 7.18/1000. For mild mental retardation (MMR; that is, IQ = 50 to 75), prevalence was 3.54/1000, and for severe mental retardation (SMR; that is, IQ < 50), it was 3.64/1000. Conclusions: Our prevalence estimate for SMR is similar to rates from previous studies conducted worldwide. Our estimate for MMR parallels the lower rates found in Scandinavian countries and contrasts with the higher rates generally reported in the US.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据