Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39368077›Full record

ArticleHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2024

Specific phobias in children with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities: SPIRIT, an adaptation and feasibility study.

Kylie M Gray, Magdalena M Apanasionok, Emma Scripps, Karen Bunning, Christine Burke, Malwina Filipczuk, Richard P Hastings, Ashley Liew, Rachel McNamara, Atiyya Nisar and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2024. 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
–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

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

  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

13 authors.

Kylie M GrayCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6518-4240
Magdalena M ApanasionokCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3861-3801
Emma ScrippsCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6140-2976
Karen BunningSchool of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7396-9205
Christine BurkeFoundation for People with Learning Disabilities, Colechurch House, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5562-8896
Malwina FilipczukCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0009-0001-5051-9842
Richard P HastingsCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0495-8270
Ashley LiewSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3825-225X
Rachel McNamaraCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Cardiff, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7280-1611
Atiyya NisarCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1996-3603
Rebecca PlayleCentre for Trials Research, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Cardiff, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2989-1092
Tim WilliamsSchool of Psychology and Clinical Sciences, University of Reading, Berkshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0072-3316
Peter E LangdonCentre for Research in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (CIDD), University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7745-1825

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is a lack of interventions for specific phobia in children and adolescents with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. Objectives: The objectives were to: (a) develop an intervention for specific phobia, together with an intervention fidelity checklist and logic model, and evaluate candidate outcome measures, together with parents/carers and clinicians; (b) describe treatment as usual; (c) model the intervention to determine the acceptability and feasibility for all stakeholders, judge the appropriateness of outcome measures, explore recruitment pathways, and examine the feasibility and acceptability of consent and associated processes; and (d) describe factors that facilitate or challenge the intervention. Design: Phase 1a: using consensus methods, an Intervention Development Group was established who met to develop the intervention, review candidate outcome measures and contribute to the development of the intervention fidelity checklists and logic model. Phase 1b: a national online survey was conducted with parents and professionals to describe treatment as usual. Phase 2: a single-group non-randomised feasibility study was designed to model the intervention and to test intervention feasibility and acceptability, outcome measures and aspects of the research process. Setting: Phase 2: participants were recruited from National Health Service community child learning disabilities teams and special schools in England. Treatment was delivered in the child learning disabilities teams. Participants: Children aged 5-15 years with moderate to severe learning disability and specific phobia, and their parents/carers. Interventions: The SPIRIT intervention comprised two half-day workshops and eight support sessions plus treatment as usual. Main outcomes: The feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and research processes, recruitment, outcome measure completion rates and acceptability, and intervention adherence. Parents completed all of the outcome measures, with very low rates of missing data. The recruitment of sites and participants was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: The intervention was successfully developed and modelled with 15 participants with moderate to severe learning disabilities and their parents. The intervention was judged to be feasible and acceptable by parents/carers and therapists. Parents/carers and therapists suggested minor intervention revisions. Limitations: Randomisation was not modelled within this feasibility study, although the majority of parents and therapists indicated that this would be acceptable. Conclusions: The SPIRIT intervention and associated study processes were judged to be feasible and acceptable. The intervention requires minor revisions. Future work: The SPIRIT intervention should be tested further within a clinical trial. Study registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN34766613. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR130177) and is published in full in

Indexed as

Feasibility StudiesIntellectual DisabilityPhobic DisordersAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolCOVID-19EnglandFemaleHumansMaleParentsANXIETYEXPOSURE THERAPYFEASIBILITYINTELLECTUAL DISABILITYLEARNING DISABILITYPARENT-MEDIATEDPSYCHOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONSPECIFIC PHOBIA

Identifiers

PMID39368077
PMCPMC11472212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.