BACKGROUND Burden due to intellectual disability(ID) is only third to the depressive disorders and anxiety disorders in India. This national burden significantly contributes to the global burden of ID and hence one ha...BACKGROUND Burden due to intellectual disability(ID) is only third to the depressive disorders and anxiety disorders in India. This national burden significantly contributes to the global burden of ID and hence one has to think globally and act locally to reduce this burden. At its best the collective prevalence of ID is in the form of narrative reviews. There is an urgent need to document the summary prevalence of ID to enhance further policymaking, national programs and resource allocation.AIM To establish the summary prevalence of ID during the past 60 years in India.METHODS Two researchers independently and electronically searched Pub Med, Scopus, and the Cochrane library from January 1961 to December 2020 using appropriate search terms. Two other investigators extracted the study design, setting, participant characteristics, and measures used to identify ID. Two other researchers appraised the quality of the studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal format for Prevalence Studies. Funnel plot and Egger’s regression test were used to ascertain the publication and small study effect on the prevalence. To evaluate the summary prevalence of ID, we used the random effects model with arcsine square-root transformation. Heterogeneity of I^(2)≥ 50% was considered substantial and we determined the heterogeneity with meta-regression. The analyses were performed using STATA(version 16).RESULTS Nineteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was publication bias;the trim-and-fill method was used to further ascertain bias. Concerns with control of confounders and the reliable measure of outcome were noted in the critical appraisal. The summary prevalence of ID was 2% [(95%CI: 2%, 3%);I^(2)= 98%] and the adjusted summary prevalence was 1.4%. Meta-regression demonstrated that age of the participants was statistically significantly related to the prevalence;other factors did not influence the prevalence or heterogeneity.CONCLUSION The summary prevalence of ID in India was established to be 2% taking into consideration the individual prevalence studies over the last six decades. This knowledge should improve the existing disability and mental health policies, national programs and service delivery to reduce the national and global burden associated with ID.展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND Burden due to intellectual disability(ID) is only third to the depressive disorders and anxiety disorders in India. This national burden significantly contributes to the global burden of ID and hence one has to think globally and act locally to reduce this burden. At its best the collective prevalence of ID is in the form of narrative reviews. There is an urgent need to document the summary prevalence of ID to enhance further policymaking, national programs and resource allocation.AIM To establish the summary prevalence of ID during the past 60 years in India.METHODS Two researchers independently and electronically searched Pub Med, Scopus, and the Cochrane library from January 1961 to December 2020 using appropriate search terms. Two other investigators extracted the study design, setting, participant characteristics, and measures used to identify ID. Two other researchers appraised the quality of the studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal format for Prevalence Studies. Funnel plot and Egger’s regression test were used to ascertain the publication and small study effect on the prevalence. To evaluate the summary prevalence of ID, we used the random effects model with arcsine square-root transformation. Heterogeneity of I^(2)≥ 50% was considered substantial and we determined the heterogeneity with meta-regression. The analyses were performed using STATA(version 16).RESULTS Nineteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was publication bias;the trim-and-fill method was used to further ascertain bias. Concerns with control of confounders and the reliable measure of outcome were noted in the critical appraisal. The summary prevalence of ID was 2% [(95%CI: 2%, 3%);I^(2)= 98%] and the adjusted summary prevalence was 1.4%. Meta-regression demonstrated that age of the participants was statistically significantly related to the prevalence;other factors did not influence the prevalence or heterogeneity.CONCLUSION The summary prevalence of ID in India was established to be 2% taking into consideration the individual prevalence studies over the last six decades. This knowledge should improve the existing disability and mental health policies, national programs and service delivery to reduce the national and global burden associated with ID.
