Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38081159›Full record

ArticleJournal of intellectual disabilities : JOID2026

Understanding the contribution of intellectual disabilities nurses. Paper 1 of 4 -Scoping literature review.

Kay Mafuba, Hazel M Chapman, Marc Forster, Rebecca Chester, Joann Kiernan, Dorothy Kupara, Chiedza Kudita

Open access · hybridAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of intellectual disabilities : JOID, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kay MafubaUniversity of West London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2184-9623
Hazel M ChapmanUniversity of Chester, UK.
Marc ForsterUniversity of West London, UK.
Rebecca ChesterBerkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Joann KiernanEdge Hill University and Alder Hey Children's Hospital, UK.
Dorothy KuparaUniversity of West London, UK.
Chiedza KuditaUniversity of West London, UK.
University of West London · GBBerkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Chester · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this scoping review was to summarise evidence on the contribution of intellectual disabilities nurses to improve the health and well-being of children, adults and older people with intellectual disability, now and for the future. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (for Scoping Reviews) (PRISMA-ScR) process and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance was used. We included 54 publications. We identified 154 interventions undertaken by intellectual disability nurses. We categorised the intellectual disability nursing interventions into three themes: effectuating nursing procedures, enhancing impact of services, and enhancing quality of life.Findings point to high quality research being essential in determining the impact and effectiveness of intellectual disability nursing interventions across the lifespan. We recommend that a searchable online compendium of intellectual disability nurse interventions be established and regularly updated. This will provide opportunities to engage more effectively in evidence-based practice.

Indexed as

Intellectual DisabilityHumanseffectuating nursing proceduresenhancing impactenhancing quality of lifeintellectual disabilitynursing procedures

Identifiers

PMID38081159
PMCPMC13230651
OpenAlexW4389539814

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.