Non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions for the reduction or prevention of topographies of behaviours that challenge in people with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: People with intellectual disability show a high prevalence of behaviours that challenge. Clinical guidelines recommend that such behaviour should first be treated with non-pharmacological interventions, but research suggests off-label pharmaceuticals are commonly used. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions for topographies of behaviours that challenge drawn from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and CENTRAL databases for RCT studies assessing an intervention (pharmacological or non-pharmacological) for behaviours that challenge (self-injury behaviour, aggression, destruction of property, irritability, and a composite overall measure) in participants with intellectual disability. The primary aim was to assess the efficacy of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions on behaviours that challenge. Secondary aims were to evaluate how effects varied over time and whether intervention, methodological, and participant characteristics moderate efficacy. We extracted standard mean difference (SMD) effect sizes (Cohen's d) from eligible studies and meta-analysed the data using a series of random effects models and subgroup analyses. This study was registered with PROSPERO 2021, CRD4202124997. FINDINGS: Of 11 912 reports identified, 82 studies were included. 42 (51%) studies assessed non-pharmacological interventions and 40 (49%) assessed pharmacological interventions. Across all studies, 4637 people with intellectual disability aged 1-84 years (mean age 17·2 years) were included. 2873 (68·2%) were male, 1339 (28·9%) were female, and for 425 (9·2%) individuals, data on gender were not available. Data on ethnicity were unavailable. Small intervention effects were found for overall behaviours that challenge at post-intervention (SMD -0·422, 95% CI -0·565 to -0·279), overall behaviours that challenge at follow-up (-0·324, -0·551 to -0·097), self-injury behaviour at post-intervention (-0·238, -0·453 to -0·023), aggression at post-intervention (-0·438, -0·566 to -0·309), and irritability at post-intervention (-0·255, -0·484 to -0·026). No significant differences between non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions were found for any topography of behaviours that challenge (all p>0·05). INTERPRETATION: A broad range of interventions for behaviours that challenge are efficacious with small effect sizes for people with intellectual disability. These findings highlight the importance of precision in the measurement of behaviours that challenge, and when operationalising intervention components and dosages. FUNDING: Cerebra.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Groves et al. reported overall small effects of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions for challenging behaviour in individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, with no differences between non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions.
“The authors reported overall small effects, with no differences between non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,588 · see citing works
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139 · see citing works
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722 · see citing works
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
Sterne, J. A. C., Savović, J., Page, M. J., Elbers, R. G., Blencowe, N. S., Boutron, I., Cates, C. J., Cheng, H.-Y., Corbett, M. S., Eldridge, S. M., et al. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l4898 · Cited by 33,583 · see citing works
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099 · see citing works
Prevalence of intellectual disability: a meta-analysis of population-based studies
Maulik, P. K., Mascarenhas, M. N., Mathers, C. D., Dua, T., & Saxena, S. (2011) · Research in Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2010.12.018 · Cited by 1,770 · see citing works
The prevalence of challenging behaviors: a total population study
Emerson, E., Kiernan, C., Alborz, A., Reeves, D., Mason, H., Swarbrick, R., Mason, L., & Hatton, C. (2001) · Research in Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1016/s0891-4222(00)00061-5 · Cited by 700 · see citing works
Research Units on Pediatric Psychopharmacology Autism Network (2005) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.162.7.1361 · Cited by 287 · see citing works
The developmental psychopathology of irritability
Leibenluft, E., & Stoddard, J. (2013) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579413000722 · Cited by 275 · see citing works
Cooper, S., Smiley, E., Jackson, A., Finlayson, J., Allan, L., Mantry, D., & Morrison, J. (2009) · Journal of Intellectual Disability Research · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008.01127.x · Cited by 268 · see citing works
Defining and measuring irritability: Construct clarification and differentiation
Toohey, M. J., & Digiuseppe, R. A. (2017) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2017.01.009 · Cited by 168 · see citing works
Findling, R. L., Pathak, S., Earley, W. R., Liu, S., & DelBello, M. P. (2014) · Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1089/cap.2013.0105 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Tsiouris, J. A. (2009) · Journal of Intellectual Disability Research · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2009.01232.x · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Heyvaert, M., Maes, B., & Onghena, P. (2010) · Journal of Intellectual Disability Research · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2010.01291.x · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Challenging Behaviour: A Unified Approach
Morris, J. (2008) · Advances in Mental Health and Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1108/17530180200800019 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Deb, S. S., & Unwin, G. (2007) · Current Opinion in Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/yco.0b013e3282ab9952 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
McQuire, C., Hassiotis, A., Harrison, B. A., & Pilling, S. (2015) · BMC Psychiatry · doi:10.1186/s12888-015-0688-2 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Heyvaert, M., Maes, B., Noortgate, W. V. D., Kuppens, S., & Onghena, P. (2011) · Research in Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2011.10.010 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
McMahon, M. J., Hatton, C., & Bowring, D. L. (2020) · Journal of Intellectual Disability Research · doi:10.1111/jir.12775 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Sabus, A., Feinstein, J. A., Romani, P. W., Goldson, E., & Blackmer, A. B. (2019) · Pharmacotherapy The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy · doi:10.1002/phar.2238 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Practitioner Review: Self‐injurious behaviour in children with developmental delay
Oliver, C., & Richards, C. (2015) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/jcpp.12425 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Self-citationWebber, L. S., McVilly, K., & Chan, J. B. (2011) · Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities · doi:10.1111/j.1468-3148.2011.00635.x · Cited by 59 · see citing works
de Kuijper, G., & Hoekstra, P. J. (2017) · Journal of Intellectual Disability Research · doi:10.1111/jir.12385 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Laverty, C., Oliver, C., Moss, J. F., Nelson, L., & Richards, C. (2020) · Molecular Autism · doi:10.1186/s13229-019-0307-z · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Self-citationRichards, C., Davies, L., & Oliver, C. (2017) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-016-3000-5 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Self-citationQuality of Life for the Camberwell Cohort
Beadle‐Brown, J., Murphy, G. H., & Di'Terlizzi, M. (2008) · Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities · doi:10.1111/j.1468-3148.2008.00473.x · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Self-injurious behaviour in people with intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder
Oliver, C., Licence, L., & Richards, C. (2017) · Current Opinion in Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/yco.0000000000000313 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Self-citationKnotter, M. H., Spruit, A., de Swart, J., Wissink, I. B., Moonen, X., & Stams, G. J. J. M. (2018) · Aggression and Violent Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.avb.2018.03.005 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
A prospective clinical analysis of pain behavior and self-injurious behavior
Symons, F. J., & Danov, S. E. (2005) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2005.07.010 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
An evaluation of intervention research for transition-age autistic youth
Bottema‐Beutel, K., LaPoint, S., Kim, S. Y., Mohiuddin, S., Yu, Q., & McKinnon, R. (2022) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613221128761 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Shankar, R., Wilcock, M., Oak, K., et al. (2018) · Drug and Therapeutics Bulletin · doi:10.1136/dtb.2018.000009 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Prevention and early intervention for behaviour problems in children with developmental disabilities
Einfeld, S., Tonge, B. J., & Clarke, K. S. (2013) · Current Opinion in Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/yco.0b013e32835fd760 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Bruinsma, E., van den Hoofdakker, B. J., Groenman, A. P., Hoekstra, P. J., de Kuijper, G. M., Klaver, M., & de Bildt, A. A. (2020) · Journal of Intellectual Disability Research · doi:10.1111/jir.12736 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
McIntyre, L. L. (2013) · International review of research in developmental disabilities · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-401662-0.00008-7 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Stoddard, J., Zik, J. B., Mazefsky, C. A., Dechant, B., & Gabriels, R. L. (2019) · Behavior Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.beth.2019.09.006 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
The Definition of Challenging Behaviour in Practice
Lowe, K., & Felce, D. (1995) · British Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1111/j.1468-3156.1995.tb00178.x · Cited by 16 · see citing works
The importance of knowing when to be precise.
Oliver, C. (2017) · Journal of Intellectual Disability Research · doi:10.1111/jir.12446 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Orsmond, G. I., Seltzer, M. M., Krauss, M. W., & Hong, J. (2003) · American Journal on Mental Retardation · doi:10.1352/0895-8017(2003)108
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Carr EG, McLaughlin DM, Giacobbe-Grieco T, Smith CE. Using mood ratings and mood induction in assessment and intervention for severe problem behavior. Am J Ment Retard 2003; 108: 32-55.
- Duval S, Tweedie R. Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot-based method. Biometrics 2000; 56: 455-63.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Meerson, R., Buchholz, H., Kammerer, K., Göster, M., Schobel, J., Ratz, C., Pryss, R., Taurines, R., Romanos, M., Gamer, M., et al. (2024) · Frontiers in Digital Health · doi:10.3389/fdgth.2024.1462682 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
- Authors
- Groves, L., Jones, C., Welham, A., Hamilton, A., Liew, A., & Richards, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Leicester (GB)
- University of Birmingham (GB)
- University of Warwick (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Groves, Laura
- Venue
- The Lancet Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-09
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 682-692
- ISSN
- 2215-0366 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4385871706
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 1.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The Lancet Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Cerebra
- 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
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
- Keywords
- intellectual disability, behavioral problems, self-harm, aggression, non-pharmacological treatment, pharmacological interventions, antipsychotic drugs, antiepileptic drugs, mood stabilizers, stimulants, irritability, property damage, treatment efficacy, treatment moderators, off-label drug use, long-term outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Aggression, Ethnicity, Female, Humans, Male, Intellectual Disability, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Databases, Factual, Self-Injurious Behavior
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
