Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37915002›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

Intellectual disabilities teaching for medical students: a scoping review.

Georgia Towson, Stephanie Daley, Sube Banerjee

Registry-linked trialAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07585708 (What Are the Patient and Medical Student Perspectives on the Learning Needs and Expectations of Training of Future Doctors in Healthcare for Individuals With Learning Differences?), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

NCT07585708 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

What Are the Patient and Medical Student Perspectives on the Learning Needs and Expectations of Training of Future Doctors in Healthcare for Individuals With Learning Differences?

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of NottinghamRan2026 to 2026Enrolled15ConditionsHealthcare Access, Experience, Learning DisabilitiesArmsExperience of healthcare
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Georgia TowsonBrighton and Sussex Medical School, Centre for Dementia Studies, University of Sussex, Trafford Building, Room 101, Falmer, BN1 9RY, UK.
Stephanie DaleyBrighton and Sussex Medical School, Centre for Dementia Studies, University of Sussex, Trafford Building, Room 101, Falmer, BN1 9RY, UK. s.daley@bsms.ac.uk.
Sube BanerjeeFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottinham, Nottingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople with intellectual disabilities are a marginalized group whose health experiences and outcomes are poor. Lack of skill and knowledge in the healthcare workforce is a contributing factor. In England, there is a new legislative requirement for mandatory intellectual disability training to be given to the existing healthcare workforce, including doctors. There is a lack of evidence about effective models of educational delivery of such training in medical schools. We undertook a scoping review to assess the range of intellectual disabilities educational interventions and their effectiveness.

methodsWe included any study from 1980 onwards which reported an educational intervention on intellectual disability, or intellectual disability and autism, for medical students from any year group. Databases searched included PUBMED, ERIC, Scopus and Web of Science as well as searches of grey literature and hand searching two journals (Medical Education and Journal of Learning Disabilities). 2,020 records were extracted, with 1,992 excluded from initial screening, and a further 12 excluded from full-text review, leaving 16 studies for inclusion. Data was extracted, quality assessed, and findings collated using narrative analysis.

resultsWe found a variety of intervention types: classroom-based teaching, simulation, placement, home visits, and panel discussions. There was substantial variation in content. Most studies involved lived experience input. Across studies, interventions had different learning outcomes which made it difficult to assess effectiveness. Overall study quality was poor, with high use of non-validated measures, making further assessment of effectiveness problematic.

conclusionsThere is a need for more consistency in intervention design, and higher quality evaluation of teaching in this area. Our review has drawn attention to the variety in teaching on this topic area and further research should focus on updating this review as curriculum changes are implemented over time.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalIntellectual DisabilityStudents, MedicalCurriculumHumansLearningEducationIntellectual disabilitiesLearning disabilitiesMedical students

Identifiers

PMID37915002
PMCPMC10621142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.