Cited by 20Down syndrome and intellectual disability researchFamily and Disability Support ResearchDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Why some adults with intellectual disability consult their general practitioner more than others

Turk, V., Kerry, S., Corney, R., Rowlands, G., Khattran, S.·2010·Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

Abstract

Background This research identifies factors affecting why some adults with intellectual disability (AWIDs) consult their general practitioner (GP) more than others. Little is known about these factors, despite AWIDs having higher health needs and reduced longevity. Current barriers to accessing health care need to be understood and overcome to achieve improved health outcomes. Methods A secondary analysis of data obtained from a stratified randomised sample of AWIDs participating in a cluster randomised trial of hand held health records. The number of GP consultations was obtained retrospectively for the year preceding initial health interviews from GP records. AWIDs and their carers were given separate health interviews using identical/adapted questions where possible. Results Two hundred and one AWIDs and or their carers from 40 practices participated (response rate 64.6%) with GP consultation data extracted for 187 AWIDs. Overall consulting levels were low, 3.2 per annum for women and 2.2 for men. Increased age, gender (women) and type of carer (paid) were all significantly associated with increased consultations. Carers reporting health problems, medications reported by AWIDs, medications recorded in GP records, and pain reported by AWIDs were also significant factors affecting consultations to GP practices after adjustment for age and type of carer. Conclusions Overall consultation rates were lower than expected, and affected by age, gender and type of carer. Targeted interventions are needed to improve attendance and promote health.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2010.01312.x

Cites

30 of 30 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Turk, V., Kerry, S., Corney, R., Rowlands, G., & Khattran, S.
Affiliations
  • National Health Service (GB)
  • St George's, University of London (GB)
  • University of Greenwich (GB)
  • London South Bank University (GB)
Corresponding author
Turk, V.
Venue
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-08-12
Volume
54
Issue
9
Pages
833-842
ISSN
  • 0964-2633 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2788
OpenAlex
W2116791130
Cited by
20
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Intellectual Disability Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Greenwich Academic Literature Archive (University of Greenwich) (submittedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
intellectual disability, adults with intellectual disabilities, general practitioner visits, health care access, barriers to care, caregivers, professional caregivers, gender differences, age differences, medication use, pain, primary care
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Health Promotion, Humans, London, Male, Intellectual Disability, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Referral and Consultation, Socioeconomic Factors, Specialties, Nursing, General Practitioners

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