Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 457

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mental disorder in adults with intellectual disability. 1: Prevalence of functional psychiatric illness among a community‐based population aged between 16 and 64 years

Open access
Deb,, S., Thomas, M., Bright, C.·2001·Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

Abstract

The reported prevalence of psychiatric illness among adults with intellectual disability (ID) varies widely between 10 and 39%; however, many methodological problems exist. The aims of the present study were to establish the prevalence of functional psychiatric illness among adults with ID who live in the community, in order to compare the overall rate and types of psychiatric illness between the population with ID and the general population without ID, and to establish the risk factors associated with psychiatric illness in adults with ID. The study was done in two stages. In the first part, a trained psychiatrist interviewed 101 randomly selected adults with ID and their carers using the Mini Psychiatric Assessment Schedule for adults with Developmental Disability (Mini PAS‐ADD) to screen for psychiatric caseness. Out of these 101 adults, 90 had sufficient communicative abilities that made the administration of Mini PAS‐ADD possible. A second trained psychiatrist interviewed 19 out of the 20 adults who were diagnosed as psychiatric cases according to the initial Mini PAS‐ADD interview. This psychiatrist interviewed patients and their carers in line with the full PAS‐ADD interview. The second psychiatrist was blind to the initial diagnoses made according to the Mini PAS‐ADD questionnaire. A final psychiatric diagnosis was made according to International Classification of Diseases – 10 th Revision (ICD‐10) criteria. Some 14.4% (95% confidence interval = 7.4–21.4%) of the cohort had a psychiatric diagnosis according to ICD‐10 criteria: 4.4% had schizophrenia, 2.2% depressive disorder, 2.2% generalized anxiety disorder, 4.4% phobic disorder and 1% delusional disorder. The overall rate of functional psychiatric illness (point prevalence) was similar to that found in the general population (16%). However, the rates of schizophrenic illness and phobic disorder were significantly higher in the study cohort compared with those in the general population (0.4% and 1.1%, respectively). Increasing age and the presence of physical disability were significantly associated with the occurrence of psychiatric illness. Out of the 11 remaining adults with severe ID, two (18%) had a diagnosis of a psychiatric illness (one mania and one anxiety disorder) according to the Diagnostic Assessment for the Severely Handicapped (DASH) questionnaire.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2788.2001.00374.x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 457

Metadata

Authors
Deb, Thomas, M., & Bright, C.
Venue
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-12
Volume
45
Issue
6
Pages
495-505
ISSN
  • 0964-2633 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2788
OpenAlex
W1995369298
Cited by
457
References
2
FWCI
11.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mental disorder in adults with intellectual disability. 1: Prevalence of functional psychiatric illness among a community‐based population aged between 16 and 64 years. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2788.2001.00374.x
The paper
Deb, Thomas, M., & Bright, C. (2001). Mental disorder in adults with intellectual disability. 1: Prevalence of functional psychiatric illness among a community‐based population aged between 16 and 64 years. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2788.2001.00374.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.