Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mortality in people with intellectual disabilities in England

Open access
Glover, G., Williams, R., Heslop, P., Oyinlola, J., Grey, J.·2017·Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

Abstract

Background: People with intellectual disabilities (IDs) die at younger ages than the general population, but nationally representative and internationally comparable mortality data about people with ID, quantifying the extent and pattern of the excess, have not previously been reported for England. Method: We used data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink database for April 2010 to March 2014 (CPRD GOLD September 2015). This source covered several hundred participating general practices comprising roughly 5% of the population of England in the period studied. General practitioner (GP) records identified people diagnosed by their GP as having ID. Linked national death certification data allowed us to derive corresponding mortality data for people with and without ID, overall and by cause. Results: Mortality rates for people with ID were significantly higher than for those without. Their all‐cause standardised mortality ratio was 3.18. Their life expectancy at birth was 19.7 years lower than for people without ID. Circulatory and respiratory diseases and neoplasms were the three most common causes of death for them. Cerebrovascular disease, thrombophlebitis and pulmonary embolism all had standardised mortality ratios greater than 3 in people with ID. This has not been described before. Other potentially avoidable causes included epilepsy (3.9% of deaths), aspiration pneumonitis (3.6%) and colorectal cancer (2.4%). Avoidable mortality analysis showed a higher proportion of deaths from causes classified as amenable to good medical care but a lower proportion from preventable causes compared with people without ID. International comparison to areas for which data have been published in sufficient detail for calculation of directly standardised rates suggest England may have higher death rates for people with ID than areas in Canada and Finland, and lower death rates than Ireland or the State of Massachusetts in the USA. Conclusions: National data about mortality in people with ID provides a basis for public health interventions. Linked data using GP records to identify people with ID could provide comprehensive population‐based monitoring in England, unbiased by the circumstances of illnesses or death; to date information governance constraints have prevented this. However, GPs in England currently identify only around 0.5% of the population as having ID, suggesting that individuals with mild, non‐syndromic ID are largely missed. Notably common causes of death suggest control of cardiovascular risk factors, epilepsy and dysphagia, management of thrombotic risks and colorectal screening are important areas for health promotion initiatives.

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 · 10.1111/jir.12314

Cites

17 of 17 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 17 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Glover, G., Williams, R., Heslop, P., Oyinlola, J., & Grey, J.
Venue
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-08-02
Volume
61
Issue
1
Pages
62-74
ISSN
  • 0964-2633 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2788
OpenAlex
W2505361552
Cited by
257
References
17
FWCI
12.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Mortality in people with intellectual disabilities in England. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/jir.12314
The paper
Glover, G., Williams, R., Heslop, P., Oyinlola, J., & Grey, J. (2017). Mortality in people with intellectual disabilities in England. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12314

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.