Intellectual Disability (Intellectual Developmental Disorder)

Intellectual Disability, also known as Intellectual Developmental Disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), pertains to a range of developmental deficits. These deficits encompass intellectual and adaptive functioning areas, which begin during the developmental period and usually manifest before 18 years of age.

Intellectual Disability (Intellectual Developmental Disorder) is a significant and multifaceted condition affecting intellectual and adaptive functioning domains. Its comprehensive understanding requires an interdisciplinary approach, considering intellectual testing, adaptive assessment, and the broader life context of the individual.

Diagnostic Criteria

The DSM-5 criteria for diagnosing Intellectual Disability comprise three essential components:

• Deficits in intellectual functions: This includes reasoning, problem-solving, planning, abstract thinking, judgment, academic learning, and learning from experience. These deficits are generally evaluated through standardized intelligence testing.
• Deficits in adaptive functioning: This involves failing to meet developmental and sociocultural standards for personal independence and social responsibility. Such deficits limit functioning in one or more daily life activities, including communication, social participation, and independent living.
• Onset during the developmental period: It's important to emphasize that Intellectual Disability originates during the developmental phase, often before age 18.

The DSM-5 uses a severity classification for Intellectual Disability based on adaptive functioning rather than IQ scores. The levels of severity are:

• Mild
• Moderate
• Severe
• Profound

This approach reflects a broader understanding that adaptive functioning is crucial in determining the level of support an individual might need.

Intellectual Disability is one of the most common developmental disorders. Numerous factors can lead to Intellectual Disability, including genetic conditions (e.g., Down syndrome, fragile X syndrome), prenatal exposures (e.g., alcohol or drugs), perinatal complications, and environmental factors in early childhood (e.g., lead exposure, malnutrition). Some cases, however, might not have a clear etiological basis.

Early identification and intervention can significantly improve outcomes for individuals with Intellectual Disability. Interventions can range from educational and occupational therapies to social skills training and supportive services.

Assessment Complexities

Intellectual Disability requires special attention in several areas, especially during assessment. Here are a few reasons why assessing Intellectual Disability can be intricate:

• Heterogeneous Population: Intellectual Disability encompasses a wide range of abilities and impairments. Thus, a one-size-fits-all approach to assessment is inappropriate. The characteristics of someone with mild Intellectual Disability can be quite different from someone with profound Intellectual Disability.
• Influence of Socio-cultural Context: Adaptive behavior, a critical component for diagnosing Intellectual Disability, is deeply influenced by cultural and social factors. What's considered "adaptive" in one culture or setting might differ in another.
• Coexisting Disorders: Many individuals with Intellectual Disability also have other coexisting conditions, such as autism spectrum disorder, mental health disorders, or physical disabilities. This comorbidity can complicate assessment and diagnosis.
• Reliability of IQ Tests: While intellectual functioning is typically assessed through IQ tests, a single test score might not capture the complete intellectual potential or limitation of an individual. Multiple assessments over time, a look at school or job performance, and input from caregivers can provide a more comprehensive picture.
• Bias in Standardized Testing: Some standardized tests may carry cultural or linguistic biases, making them less reliable for certain populations.
• Impact of Environmental Factors: Environmental deprivation, lack of access to education, or traumatic experiences can affect performance on assessments. It's essential to differentiate between intellectual disabilities and limitations in knowledge or skills due to external factors.
• Late Onset of Related Conditions: Some genetic conditions, such as Huntington's disease, can manifest intellectual impairments later in life. While they might not strictly fit the criteria for Intellectual Disability (because of the developmental criterion), they present assessment challenges related to cognitive decline.
• Ethical Considerations: Given the potential long-term impact of an Intellectual Disability diagnosis on an individual's self-perception, educational opportunities, and vocational prospects, it's crucial to approach assessment and diagnosis with sensitivity and ethical rigor.

When assessing Intellectual Disability, it is imperative to adopt a comprehensive and nuanced approach. A multidisciplinary team, including psychologists, speech therapists, occupational therapists, educators, and medical professionals, should be involved in the evaluation process. This team should leverage a variety of assessment methods, ranging from clinical interviews and observational techniques to standardized tests. Additionally, it's essential to ensure that the selected assessment tools are both culturally and linguistically appropriate for the individual being evaluated. Furthermore, the individual's history and environmental context should always be at the forefront when interpreting the results, ensuring a holistic understanding of their unique situation.

While assessing Intellectual Disability presents various challenges, careful, comprehensive, and sensitive evaluation can ensure accurate diagnosis and appropriate support.

The Impacts

Intellectual Disability can have wide-ranging impacts on a person's life, influencing various domains of functioning, personal experiences, and overall life trajectory. The effects vary significantly based on the severity of the disability, available support systems, coexisting conditions, and individual differences. Here are some general impacts of Intellectual Disability on an individual's life:

• Cognitive Functioning: Individuals with Intellectual Disability typically experience challenges in areas such as problem-solving, abstract thinking, reasoning, learning, and memory. These cognitive limitations can affect daily decision-making and understanding complex concepts.
• Adaptive Behavior: Intellectual Disability affects adaptive skills, which include conceptual, social, and practical skills used in everyday life. This might encompass challenges in communication, self-care, social interactions, household tasks, safety, and work responsibilities.
• Social Impacts: Social interactions can be challenging. Individuals may struggle to interpret social cues or norms, which can lead to difficulty in forming and maintaining relationships. There can also be a heightened vulnerability to exploitation or bullying.
• Educational Impacts: Academic challenges are common, necessitating specialized educational programs, additional learning support, or modified curricula. Learning might take longer, and some concepts might need to be taught in more concrete or hands-on ways.
• Vocational Impacts: Employment opportunities may be limited depending on the severity of the disability. Some individuals may require supportive employment settings or vocational training tailored to their capabilities.
• Mental Health: Individuals with Intellectual Disability are at a heightened risk for various mental health disorders, including anxiety, depression, and behavioral disorders. They might also have difficulty expressing their emotions or understanding their mental health needs.
• Health Impacts: Coexisting health issues, both physical and neurological, are not uncommon. There might be a higher susceptibility to certain conditions or challenges in accessing appropriate healthcare. Health literacy, or understanding and managing one's health needs, can also be impacted.
• Dependency and Autonomy: Depending on the severity of the disability, there might be a lifelong dependence on caregivers for various tasks. This can influence the individual's sense of autonomy and self-determination.
• Stigmatization and Discrimination: Individuals with Intellectual Disability can face societal stigmatization and discrimination, affecting their self-esteem, opportunities, and overall well-being.
• Legal Implications: Depending on local laws and policies, individuals with Intellectual Disability might have limitations or modifications in their legal rights, especially in areas like consent, voting, or entering into contracts.
• Lifestyle: Activities of daily living, recreation, hobbies, and community involvement might be influenced by the individual's capabilities and support structures.

While Intellectual Disability poses numerous challenges, it's essential to note that many individuals with Intellectual Disability lead fulfilling lives, especially when provided with appropriate support, opportunities, and understanding from society. The focus on strengths, capabilities, and individualized interventions can significantly enhance their quality of life.

The Etiology (Origins and Causes)

The causes and origins of Intellectual Disability are multifaceted, encompassing a diverse range of genetic, environmental, and biological factors. The exact cause may vary from one individual to another, and in many cases, a specific etiology may not be identifiable. Here's a breakdown of some of the primary factors:

• Genetic Factors: Genetic conditions can lead to Intellectual Disability. Some of the more well-known genetic disorders include Down syndrome, fragile X syndrome, and phenylketonuria (PKU). Advances in genetic testing have allowed for the identification of many syndromes and specific gene mutations associated with Intellectual Disability (Batshaw et al., 2013).
• Prenatal Exposures: Exposure to certain substances or conditions during pregnancy can result in Intellectual Disability. This includes maternal use of alcohol or drugs, infections during pregnancy (like rubella), or exposure to environmental toxins, such as lead (Williams & Smith, 2015).
• Perinatal Causes: Complications during birth can lead to conditions that result in Intellectual Disability, including premature birth, low birth weight, or a lack of oxygen during birth, leading to conditions like cerebral palsy (Maulik et al., 2011).
• Environmental Factors: After birth, exposure to certain environmental toxins (e.g., lead poisoning) or severe malnutrition, especially during critical periods of brain development, can result in Intellectual Disability (Bellinger, 2008).
• Infections and Diseases: Infections like meningitis or encephalitis, especially if untreated or not treated promptly, can lead to brain damage and subsequent Intellectual Disability (Granerød & Crowcroft, 2007).
• Brain Trauma: Traumatic brain injuries, especially during early childhood when the brain is still developing, can result in intellectual disabilities (Anderson et al., 2005).
• Unknown Causes: In many cases, despite thorough assessment, the exact cause of Intellectual Disability remains unidentified. It's estimated that for a significant portion of individuals with Intellectual Disability, the specific etiology is not determined (Batshaw et al., 2013).

Understanding the etiology of Intellectual Disability is crucial for both prevention and intervention. While some causes are genetic and might not be preventable, understanding the environmental and preventable biological causes can lead to public health initiatives that minimize the incidence of Intellectual Disability.

Comorbidities

Individuals with Intellectual Disability often experience coexisting medical, neurodevelopmental, and psychiatric conditions. These conditions can further complicate the clinical presentation and might influence intervention approaches.

Neurodevelopmental Disorders:

• Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD): A significant proportion of individuals with ASD also have coexisting Intellectual Disability. The two conditions share overlapping symptoms, such as social communication challenges, but each also has distinct features (Matson & Shoemaker, 2009).
• Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): Individuals with Intellectual Disability may also present with symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity characteristic of ADHD (Aman, 1991).

Psychiatric Disorders:

• Depressive Disorders: Individuals with Intellectual Disability are vulnerable to depressive disorders, although symptom expression might differ from the general population (Hermans & Evenhuis, 2010).
• Anxiety Disorders: Anxiety disorders, including generalized anxiety disorder, specific phobias, and others, may be present in individuals with Intellectual Disability. However, the manifestation might be less verbal and more behavioral (Dekker & Koot, 2003).
• Behavioral Disorders: Aggression, self-injury, and other disruptive behaviors can be seen in some individuals with Intellectual Disability, often as a result of communication challenges, sensory sensitivities, or other underlying factors (Holden & Gitlesen, 2006).

Medical Conditions:

• Epilepsy: Seizure disorders are more common in individuals with Intellectual Disability than in the general population, especially among those with severe or profound Intellectual Disability (Morgan et al., 2012).
• Sensory Impairments: Hearing or visual impairments might coexist with Intellectual Disability, influencing adaptive and cognitive functioning (Evenhuis, 1995).
• Motor Disorders: Cerebral palsy or other motor coordination disorders can coexist with Intellectual Disability, especially if there's a shared etiological factor like prenatal injury (Himmelmann et al., 2010).

Recognizing and addressing comorbidities in individuals with Intellectual Disability is crucial for optimal management and quality of life improvement. Multidisciplinary approaches that take into account the full range of an individual's needs can ensure comprehensive care.

Risk Factors

The etiology of Intellectual Disability encompasses a myriad of risk factors which can be categorized under genetic, prenatal and perinatal, environmental, and postnatal domains. From a genetic perspective, inherited disorders such as Down syndrome, fragile X syndrome, and Tay-Sachs disease are associated with Intellectual Disability (Penrose, 1949; Hagerman, 2008). Additionally, advanced maternal and paternal ages have been tied to increased chances of chromosomal abnormalities leading to Intellectual Disability (Yip et al., 2006).

Prenatal and perinatal influences also play a pivotal role. The consumption of alcohol or drugs by pregnant mothers can lead to disorders like Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders which have an impact on the fetal brain (May et al., 2009). Maternal infections during pregnancy, such as rubella or toxoplasmosis, can cause congenital complications linked to Intellectual Disability (Oster, 1981). Furthermore, premature birth, especially in cases of very low birth weight, amplifies the risk of Intellectual Disability (Hack et al., 2002), as do complications during birth, like oxygen deprivation, that may result in associated conditions like cerebral palsy (Kurinczuk et al., 2010).

Environmentally, childhood exposure to high lead levels can manifest in cognitive impairments (Bellinger, 2008), while severe malnutrition, especially during pivotal brain development stages, can detrimentally impact cognitive growth (Grantham-McGregor, 2007). Postnatal factors encompass traumatic brain injuries during early childhood leading to Intellectual Disability (Anderson et al., 2005) and the profound cognitive hindrances caused by prolonged neglect in early years (Nelson et al., 2014). Moreover, infections like meningitis or encephalitis can precipitate brain damage and Intellectual Disability if they're not treated promptly or effectively (Granerød & Crowcroft, 2007).

Understanding these diverse risk factors is indispensable for prevention, early intervention, and tailored support strategies. Enhanced public awareness, health initiatives, and education can potentially counteract some of these risk factors.

Case Study

Introduction: Jamie, a 26-year-old transgender male, presented with a wish to undergo hormone therapy and, later, gender-affirming surgery. Born female, Jamie has identified as male since adolescence. In addition to his gender dysphoria, Jamie has been diagnosed with moderate intellectual disability.

Background: Growing up, Jamie always felt a disconnect with his assigned gender. His family, mostly conservative, took time to accept his gender identity but eventually became supportive. They sought psychological assistance to understand better and support Jamie's journey. However, the presence of intellectual disability posed additional complexities, particularly around the comprehension of implications and consequences associated with gender transition.

Mental Health and Medical Assessment: Given the dual challenge of gender dysphoria and intellectual disability, multidisciplinary collaboration was essential. Jamie underwent psychological assessment to gauge his understanding of the transition process, potential challenges, and risks associated with medical interventions. Concurrently, medical assessments aimed to ascertain his physical suitability for hormone therapy and eventual surgery.

Ethical Issues and Navigating Consent:

• Informed Consent: The cornerstone of medical procedures, informed consent requires an understanding of the nature, purpose, risks, and potential benefits of a procedure. With Jamie's intellectual disability, ascertaining true comprehension posed a challenge. Ethically, the team had to ensure Jamie wasn't being unduly influenced and genuinely understood the permanence and risks of the procedures.
• Balancing Autonomy with Best Interests: Respecting Jamie's autonomy and right to gender expression was paramount. However, ensuring decisions made were in Jamie's best interest added another layer of ethical complexity. The team had to be certain Jamie's desire for transition wasn't being overly influenced by external pressures.
• Privacy and Confidentiality: Balancing Jamie's right to privacy with the involvement of caregivers or family in decision-making was delicate. Given his intellectual disability, family involvement was beneficial, but ensuring Jamie's confidentiality was equally vital.
• Access to Care: Ethically, Jamie should have equal access to care as any other individual seeking gender-affirming procedures. His intellectual disability shouldn't serve as a barrier but rather as a factor in personalized care.

Outcome:

Following extensive evaluations, it was determined Jamie had a consistent and persistent identification as male and a genuine desire for transition. While he required more time and varied teaching methods to understand the medical implications, he demonstrated adequate comprehension. With the support of a therapist, Jamie began hormone therapy.

During this period, regular check-ins were maintained to assess his emotional and psychological well-being. It was decided that any surgical interventions would be considered after a prolonged period on hormone therapy, ensuring Jamie was continuously informed and supported in his decisions.

Conclusion:

Jamie's case highlights the intricate balance mental health and medical professionals must maintain when navigating the dual challenges of gender transition and intellectual disability. Ethical considerations, such as informed consent and ensuring the individual's best interests, remain paramount. Collaborative care and a deep commitment to understanding Jamie's desires and needs were supportive and ethical pathways received through co-forward.

Recent Psychology Research Findings

Intellectual Disability remains a focal area of psychological research, given its intricate nature and profound impact on affected individuals and their families. Understanding Intellectual Disability is not merely about pinpointing its causes but also about providing effective interventions, gauging co-occurring disorders, and assessing the life trajectories of those with Intellectual Disability. This review offers a glance into some pivotal research findings on Intellectual Disability leading up to 2021. The studies mentioned cover a spectrum of areas—from diagnostic criteria revisions to the genetic underpinnings of the disorder, thereby offering a comprehensive picture of the evolving understanding of Intellectual Disability in the field of psychology.

Criteria Refinement: Since the release of the DSM-5 in 2013, there's been a shift in the diagnostic criteria for Intellectual Disability. Emphasizing a more holistic understanding, the criteria now prioritize adaptive functioning limitations rather than focusing strictly on IQ cutoffs. Maulik and team (2011) emphasized the need to consider socio-cultural contexts, especially in assessing adaptive behaviors.

Genetic Underpinnings: With advances in genomics, there's been a surge in the identification of genetic variations associated with Intellectual Disability. Deciphering Developmental Disorders Study (2017) reported numerous novel genes associated with developmental disorders, offering a foundation for understanding the genetic basis of Intellectual Disability and paving the way for potential interventions.

Early Intervention: Early interventions can be crucial for individuals with Intellectual Disability. A study by Hauser-Cram et al. (2001) found that early interventions could lead to positive outcomes in terms of adaptive behaviors, especially when initiated in infancy or early childhood.

Co-occurring Mental Health Issues: People with Intellectual Disability are at an increased risk for other mental health disorders. Cooper et al. (2007) found that individuals with Intellectual Disability have a higher prevalence of coexisting psychiatric disorders than the general population, emphasizing the need for comprehensive assessments and treatments.

Transition to Adulthood: Transitioning to adulthood can be particularly challenging for individuals with Intellectual Disability. A longitudinal study by Taylor and Mailick (2014) highlighted the dynamic trajectories during this transition, with various factors, including family support and behavioral issues, influencing outcomes.

Treatment and Interventions

The management and treatment of Intellectual Disability rely heavily on individualized interventions tailored to the specific needs, abilities, and deficits of the person. A core tenet in Intellectual Disability intervention is the emphasis on early intervention. These early interventions, often started during infancy or early childhood, have shown promise in positively impacting adaptive behaviors and overall functioning (Guralnick, 1997).

Behavioral therapies are widely used to address specific challenges associated with Intellectual Disability, such as maladaptive behaviors, social skills deficits, or difficulties in communication. Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) has been particularly effective, utilizing positive reinforcement to encourage desired behaviors and reduce unwanted ones (Matson, Boisjoli, & Mahan, 2009).

For those with Intellectual Disability and concurrent psychiatric or emotional disturbances, psychotherapeutic interventions, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, can be adapted and used successfully (Sturmey, 2004). These therapies, although modified, can help address symptoms of anxiety, depression, or other coexisting mental health issues.

Additionally, occupational and physical therapies play a crucial role, especially for individuals with coexisting motor difficulties or those needing assistance in daily living skills. Occupational therapy can enhance fine motor skills and day-to-day functioning, while physical therapy addresses gross motor challenges (Case-Smith & Arbesman, 2008).

Pharmacological interventions, while not treating the Intellectual Disability itself, can be beneficial for associated symptoms or coexisting conditions. For instance, medications might be prescribed for individuals with Intellectual Disability who also present with ADHD, aggressive behaviors, or mood disorders (Deb, Farmah, & Unwin, 2014).

Family support and education are also paramount. Interventions often include training for caregivers, ensuring that the strategies used by professionals are consistently applied at home, thereby maximizing their effectiveness (Hastings & Beck, 2004).

Implications if Untreated

When Intellectual Disability remains untreated or inadequately addressed, the consequences can be profound, affecting various aspects of an individual's life and their family's experience. One primary implication of not providing timely interventions is the exacerbation of adaptive functioning deficits. Individuals with Intellectual Disability already face challenges in conceptual, social, and practical domains of adaptive functioning; without appropriate interventions, these challenges may become more severe, impacting their ability to perform daily tasks, interact socially, and understand complex concepts (Tassé et al., 2016).

Furthermore, untreated Intellectual Disability is frequently associated with heightened behavioral issues, such as aggression, self-injurious behaviors, and other disruptive behaviors. A study by Emerson (2003) found that individuals with Intellectual Disability who did not receive adequate behavioral interventions were more prone to exhibit challenging behaviors, which could lead to potential harm to themselves or others.

Mental health is another area of concern. People with Intellectual Disability are already at an elevated risk for psychiatric disorders, including mood disorders, anxiety disorders, and other mental health challenges. Without treatment and support tailored to their needs, these individuals will likely experience heightened severity and chronicity of these psychiatric conditions (Cooper et al., 2007).

The family context cannot be overlooked. Families of individuals with untreated Intellectual Disability may face heightened stress, caregiver burden, and potential burnout, leading to strained family dynamics and potentially negative health outcomes for caregivers (Hastings, 2002).

In the broader societal context, untreated Intellectual Disability can lead to increased dependency on welfare systems, limited vocational opportunities, and a lower overall quality of life. This affects the individual and their immediate family and has broader societal implications regarding resource allocation and community integration (Verdugo et al., 2009).

Summary

Over the years, our understanding of Intellectual Disability has evolved considerably. From the research-based insights into its diagnosis, etiology, and comorbidities, to the development of effective treatments and interventions, the journey of comprehending Intellectual Disability has been transformative. A critical revelation from this journey is the realization of the profound implications when Intellectual Disability remains untreated. The potential challenges faced by individuals with Intellectual Disability, their families, and society at large further underscore the importance of early detection, appropriate support, and ongoing care.

Yet, as we reflect on these findings, a brighter narrative lies. Our perspective towards Intellectual Disability and neurodivergence as a whole has experienced a significant paradigm shift. Gone are the days of predominantly judgmental language and stigmatizing perspectives. Today, the narrative is enriched with acceptance, understanding, and a genuine appreciation for human diversity. This transformation didn't merely happen; it was the result of concerted efforts by researchers, clinicians, advocates, families, and individuals with Intellectual Disability themselves, who have consistently championed for inclusivity and acceptance.

The growing embrace of neurodiversity underscores our society's acknowledgment that every individual, regardless of their cognitive abilities, contributes uniquely and valuably to the tapestry of human experience. As we continue to advance in our understanding and interventions for Intellectual Disability, we're not just focusing on "treatment" in the traditional sense. We are fostering environments where individuals with Intellectual Disability can thrive, be understood, and lead fulfilling lives.

In this light, there's immense hope. With each passing year, our collective efforts bring us closer to a world where Intellectual Disability is not a label of limitation but a testament to the resilience of the human spirit, the adaptability of communities, and the boundless possibilities that lie ahead when we all come together in understanding and support.

References

Aman, M. G. (1991). Assessing psychiatric symptoms in persons with mental retardation: the use of rating scales and other assessment methods. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 12(4), 345-359.

Anderson, V., Catroppa, C., Morse, S., Haritou, F., & Rosenfeld, J. (2005). Functional plasticity or vulnerability after early brain injury? Pediatrics, 116(6), 1374-1382.

Anderson, V., Catroppa, C., Morse, S., Haritou, F., & Rosenfeld, J. (2005). Functional plasticity or vulnerability after early brain injury? Pediatrics, 116(6), 1374-1382.

Batshaw, M. L., Roizen, N. J., & Lotrecchiano, G. R. (2013). Children with disabilities (7th ed.). Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes Publishing.

Bellinger, D. C. (2008). Very low lead exposures and children's neurodevelopment. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 20(2), 172-177.

Case-Smith, J., & Arbesman, M. (2008). Evidence-based review of interventions for autism used in or of relevance to occupational therapy. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62(4), 416-429.

Cooper, S. A., Smiley, E., Morrison, J., Williamson, A., & Allan, L. (2007). Mental ill-health in adults with intellectual disabilities: prevalence and associated factors. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 190(1), 27-35.

Deb, S., Farmah, B. K., & Unwin, G. (2014). Pharmacological interventions for self-injurious behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014(4), CD009084.

Deciphering Developmental Disorders Study. (2017). Prevalence and architecture of de novo mutations in developmental disorders. Nature, 542(7642), 433-438.

Dekker, M. C., & Koot, H. M. (2003). DSM‐IV disorders in children with borderline to moderate intellectual disability. I: Prevalence and impact. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(8), 915-922.

Emerson, E. (2003). Prevalence of psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents with and without intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 47(1), 51-58.

Evenhuis, H. (1995). Medical aspects of ageing in a population with intellectual disability: III. Mobility, internal conditions and cancer. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 39(1), 11-21.

Granerød, J., & Crowcroft, N. S. (2007). The epidemiology of acute encephalitis. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 17(4-5), 406-428.

Grantham-McGregor, S. (2007). Developmental potential in the first 5 years for children in developing countries. The Lancet, 369(9555), 60-70.

Guralnick, M. J. (1997). The effectiveness of early intervention. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

Hack, M., Flannery, D. J., Schluchter, M., Cartar, L., Borawski, E., & Klein, N. (2002). Outcomes in young adulthood for very-low-birth-weight infants. The New England Journal of Medicine, 346(3), 149-157.

Hagerman, R. J. (2008). The fragile X prevalence paradox. Journal of Medical Genetics, 45(8), 498-499.

Hastings, R. P. (2002). Parental stress and behaviour problems of children with developmental disability. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 27(3), 149-160.

Hastings, R. P., & Beck, A. (2004). Practitioner review: Stress intervention for parents of children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(8), 1338-1349.

Hauser-Cram, P., Warfield, M. E., Shonkoff, J. P., Krauss, M. W., Sayer, A., & Upshur, C. C. (2001). Children with disabilities: A longitudinal study of child development and parent well-being. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 66(3), i-114.

Hermans, H., & Evenhuis, H. (2010). Characteristics of instruments screening for depression in adults with intellectual disabilities: Systematic review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 31(6), 1109-1120.

Himmelmann, K., Sundh, V., & Beckung, E. (2010). Developmental trends in infants and preschool children with cerebral palsy. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 31(6), 1196-1204.

Holden, B., & Gitlesen, J. P. (2006). Prevalence of psychiatric symptoms in adults with intellectual disability and challenging behaviour. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 27(4), 323-336.

Kurinczuk, J. J., White-Koning, M., & Badawi, N. (2010). Epidemiology of neonatal encephalopathy and hypoxic–ischaemic encephalopathy. Early Human Development, 86(6), 329-338.

Matson, J. L., & Shoemaker, M. (2009). Intellectual disability and its relationship to autism spectrum disorders. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30(6), 1107-1114.

Matson, J. L., Boisjoli, J. A., & Mahan, S. (2009). The relation of communication and challenging behaviors in infants and toddlers with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 21(4), 253-261.

Maulik, P. K., Mascarenhas, M. N., Mathers, C. D., Dua, T., & Saxena, S. (2011). Prevalence of intellectual disability: A meta-analysis of population-based studies. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32(2), 419-436.

May, P. A., Gossage, J. P., Kalberg, W. O., Robinson, L. K., Buckley, D., Manning, M., & Hoyme, H. E. (2009). Prevalence and epidemiologic characteristics of FASD from various research methods with an emphasis on recent in-school studies. Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 15(3), 176-192.

Morgan, C. L., Ahmed, Z., & Kerr, M. P. (2012). Health care provision for people with intellectual disability and a comorbid mental health problem. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 25(5), 342-347.

Nelson, C. A., Fox, N. A., & Zeanah, C. H. (2014). Romania’s abandoned children: Deprivation, brain development, and the struggle for recovery. Harvard University Press.

Oster, M. E. (1981). Rubella and congenital rubella syndrome. American Family Physician, 24(4), 135-141.

Penrose, L. S. (1949). The incidence of mongolism in the general population. Journal of Mental Science, 95(398), 685.

Sparrow, S. S., Cicchetti, D. V., & Saulnier, C. A. (2016). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (3rd ed.). Bloomington, MN: Pearson.

Sturmey, P. (2004). Cognitive therapy with people with intellectual disabilities: A selective review and critique. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy: An International Journal of Theory & Practice, 11(4), 222-232.

Tassé, M. J., Luckasson, R., & Schalock, R. L. (2016). The relation between intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior in the diagnosis of intellectual disability. Intellectual and developmental disabilities, 54(6), 381-390.

Taylor, J. L., & Mailick, M. R. (2014). A longitudinal examination of 10-year change in vocational and educational activities for adults with autism spectrum disorders. Developmental Psychology, 50(3), 699-708.

Verdugo, M. Á., Guillén, V. M., Arias, B., Vicente, E., & Badia, M. (2009). Quality of life of people with intellectual disabilities: Validation of the Spanish version of the ICIDH-2. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30(6), 1230-1238.

Wechsler, D. (2014). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (5th ed.). Bloomington, MN: Pearson.

Williams, J., & Smith, L. (2015). Fetal alcohol spectrum disorders: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Routledge.

Yip, B. H., Pawitan, Y., & Czene, K. (2006). Parental age and risk of childhood cancers: a population-based cohort study from Sweden. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35(6), 1495-1503.