Systematic review of assessment tools reveals psychometric soundness in measuring emotional development in individuals with intellectual disabilities, suggesting improvements in care.
People with intellectual disabilities can experience psychological distress and show behaviours of concern, such as self-injurious behaviour or physical aggression. One contributing factor is the degree to which their emotional needs are understood by those in their environment. This paper aims to review the psychometric properties of assessment tools measuring emotional development in individuals with intellectual disabilities. A systematic literature review was conducted, which included 5 databases and followed the PRISMA guidance (registration number: CRD42024553322). Seven assessment tools were included in this review: the SAED, SED-S, Brief SED-S, SED-R, and SED-R2, SEO-Lukas and the Frankish model, and the psychometric properties were assessed in accordance with the COSMIN good measurement properties checklist. Sixteen studies were included in this review. Internal consistency was assessed in six of the seven measures; validity was only assessed in the SAED and SED-S. Whilst both of these measures were considered reliable and valid, studies on the SAED had greater methodological quality, and the SED-S had a larger quantity of evidence. Both the SAED and the SED-S are psychometrically sound tools, based on the overall quality and sufficiency of the evidence. Further research should consider the usability, sensitivity and cross-cultural use, especially in UK populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leal et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: