Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35193910›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Healthy Ageing and Intellectual Disability study: summary of findings and the protocol for the 10-year follow-up study.

Marleen J de Leeuw, Alyt Oppewal, Roy G Elbers, Mireille W E J Knulst, Marco C van Maurik, Marjoleine C van Bruggen, Thessa I M Hilgenkamp, Patrick J E Bindels, Dederieke A M Maes-Festen

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Healthy ageing for older adult people with intellectual disability: a scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Immediate and Underlying Causes of Death and Survival Rates in Aging Adults With Down Syndrome.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Marleen J de LeeuwDepartment of General Practice, Intellectual Disability Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands m.j.deleeuw@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-6357-6213
Alyt OppewalDepartment of General Practice, Intellectual Disability Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6630-8807
Roy G ElbersDepartment of General Practice, Intellectual Disability Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4850-6954
Mireille W E J KnulstDepartment of General Practice, Intellectual Disability Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Marco C van MaurikDepartment of General Practice, Intellectual Disability Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9295-1940
Marjoleine C van BruggenDepartment of General Practice, Intellectual Disability Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3026-0164
Thessa I M HilgenkampDepartment of General Practice, Intellectual Disability Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9882-163X
Patrick J E BindelsDepartment of General Practice, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5941-4820
Dederieke A M Maes-FestenDepartment of General Practice, Intellectual Disability Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7613-0720

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Healthy Ageing and Intellectual Disability (HA-ID) study is a prospective multicentre cohort study in the Netherlands that started in 2008, including 1050 older adults (aged ≥50) with intellectual disabilities (ID). The study is designed to learn more about the health and health risks of this group as they age. Compared with the amount of research in the general population, epidemiological research into the health of older adults with ID is still in its infancy. Longitudinal data about the health of this vulnerable and relatively unhealthy group are needed so that policy and care can be prioritised and for guiding clinical decision making about screening, prevention and treatment to improve healthy ageing. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This article presents a summary of the previous findings of the HA-ID study and describes the design of the 10-year follow-up in which a wide range of health data will be collected within five research themes: (1) cardiovascular disease; (2) physical activity, fitness and musculoskeletal disorders; (3) psychological problems and psychiatric disorders; (4) nutrition and nutritional state; and (5) frailty. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the 10-year follow-up measurements of the HA-ID study has been obtained from the Medical Ethics Review Committee of the Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam (MEC-2019-0562). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This cohort study is registered in the Dutch Trial Register (NTR number NL8564) and has been conducted according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Indexed as

Healthy AgingIntellectual DisabilityAgedCohort StudiesFollow-Up StudiesHumansProspective Studiesepidemiologygeriatric medicinepublic health

Identifiers

PMID35193910
PMCPMC8867312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.