The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Psychiatric care utilization among older people with intellectual disability in comparison with the general population: a register study
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: People with intellectual disability have been found to have higher prevalence of psychiatric disorders than the general population. However, they do not seem to have a corresponding increase in psychiatric care utilization. The aim of the present study was to investigate psychiatric care utilization among older people with intellectual disability. METHODS: We used a cohort of people with intellectual disability, 55+ years in 2012 (n = 7936), and an equally sized age and sex matched reference cohort from the general population. Psychiatric care utilization was measured using registrations in the Swedish National Patient register during 2002-2012, where each registration corresponds to a psychiatric care occasion. RESULTS: About 20 % of those with intellectual disability had at least one registration during the study period, compared to some 6 % in the general population sample. In the whole cohort as well as stratified by sex, people with intellectual disability were 3-4 times more likely than those in the general population sample to have had at least one registration during the study period. The effect was, however, only consistent in age groups comprising people younger than 65 years. Among people with intellectual disability, men were more likely than women to have had at least one registration, and people living in special housing (group home or service home) during the entire study period were less likely than those who only lived in special housing for parts of the study or not at all. People with intellectual disability had longer stays per inpatient registration compared with the general population sample. When stratifying on sex, the effect was found only among men, although there were no sex differences within the cohort of people with intellectual disability. Among people with intellectual disability, living in special housing during the entire study period was associated with shorter stays per inpatient registration. CONCLUSIONS: Although people with intellectual disability had higher psychiatric care utilization than the general population during the 11 year study period, it does not correspond to the high prevalence of psychiatric disorders in this population. Future research is required to establish if the level of care utilization is appropriate among older people with intellectual disability.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The high psychiatric contact in the ASD group exceeds that in the larger LSS group and general population.
“This exceeds the numbers (20% in contact with psychiatric care) reported by Axmon et al. (2016) for the larger group of older people eligible for LSS services, which in turn exceeded the 6% in the matched group from the general population.”
From Older Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorders in Sweden: A Register Study of Diagnoses, Psychiatric Care Utilization and Psychotropic Medication of 601 Individuals (2018) · cites this paper as Axmon et al. 2016
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
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 39 · Cited by 18
Metadata
- Authors
- Axmon, A., Björne, P., Nylander, L., & Ahlström, G.
- Affiliations
- Lund University (SE)
- Malmö Municipality (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Axmon, A.
- Venue
- BMC Psychiatry
- Published
- 2016-11-09
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 389-389
- ISSN
- 1471-244X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5103447
- OpenAlex
- W2552289390
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4
- FWCI
- 2.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- BMC Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd (2014-4753)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
- Keywords
- intellectual disability, older adults, psychiatric service utilization, mental health services, mental illness, special housing, group homes, length of hospital stay, sex differences
- MeSH terms
- Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Housing, Humans, Length of Stay, Male, Mental Health Services, Intellectual Disability, Middle Aged, Registries, Sex Factors, Sweden, Case-Control Studies
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