Cited by 62Behavioral and Psychological StudiesDown syndrome and intellectual disability researchAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Efficacy of atypical antipsychotic medication in the management of behaviour problems in children with intellectual disabilities and borderline intelligence: A systematic review

Unwin, Gemma L., Deb, Shoumitro·2011·Research in Developmental Disabilities

Abstract

The use of medications to manage problem behaviours is widespread. However, robust evidence to support their use seems to be lacking. The aim was to review research evidence into the efficacy of atypical antipsychotic medication in managing problem behaviour in children with intellectual disabilities and borderline intelligence. A systematic review was conducted for placebo-controlled randomised double-blind trials. The included studies (N = 6) showed that risperidone was significantly more effective than placebo in managing problem behaviours. However, most studies highlighted adverse events primarily somnolence and weight gain. There is now some evidence in favour of the use of risperidone. However, because of possible adverse events, these medications have to be used with caution.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ridd.2011.07.031

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is some evidence for the effectiveness of risperidone in addressing challenging behaviour in children with autism spectrum disorder, including those with intellectual disability.

    “There is some evidence for the effectiveness of risperidone in addressing challenging behaviour in children with autism spectrum disorder, including those with intellectual disability (Unwin 2011; National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health 2012).”

    From Interventions for challenging behaviour in intellectual disability (2014) · cites this paper as Unwin 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Unwin, G. L., & Deb, S.
Affiliations
University of Birmingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Unwin, Gemma L.
Venue
Research in Developmental Disabilities
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-11
Volume
32
Issue
6
Pages
2121-2133
ISSN
0891-4222 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2004842910
Cited by
62
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Research in Developmental Disabilities (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Keywords
atypical antipsychotics, risperidone, behavioral problems, intellectual disability, borderline intellectual functioning, children, drug efficacy, adverse events, sleepiness, weight gain
MeSH terms
Child, Child Behavior Disorders, Humans, Intellectual Disability, Antipsychotic Agents

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review