Medical students’ views on training in intellectual disabilities

Article Figures & Data

Table 1

Respondents’ demographic characteristics and amount and type of contact with people with intellectual disabilities (ID): N = 196, unless stated.

CHARACTERISTICS	N (%)
Sex
• Male	100 (51.0)
• Female	96 (49.0)
Age (n = 194)
• 20–29 y	167 (86.1)
• 30 y and older	27 (13.9)
Preferences categories for residency training^* (n=195)
• General practitioner and family physician	37 (19.0)
• Specialist in surgical medicine^†	29 (14.9)
• Specialist in clinical medicine^‡	122 (62.6)
• Specialist in laboratory medicine^§	4 (2.1)
• Undecided	3 (1.5)
Do you have or have you had a close family member with ID?
• Yes	16 (8.2)
• No	180 (91.8)
Have you ever known anyone personally with ID other than a family member? (n = 195)
• Yes	82 (42.1)
• No	113 (57.9)
Have you ever worked alongside someone with ID who was a coworker?
• Yes	12 (6.1)
• No	184 (93.9)
Have you ever worked or volunteered to support someone with ID?
• Yes	65 (33.2)
• No	131 (66.8)
Have you ever seen people with ID where you live, work, or go to school?
• Yes	162 (82.7)
• No	34 (17.3)

↵* Categories follow Canada’s National Occupational Classification System.23
↵† This category includes all surgeons, ophthalmologists, and urologists.
↵‡ Examples from this category include anesthetists, cardiologists, dermatologists, emergency physicians, geriatricians, neurologists, oncologists, pediatricians, psychiatrists, and rheumatologists.
↵§ This category includes all pathologists, medical biochemists, and microbiologists.

Table 2

Reported coverage of various topics on intellectual disabilities (ID) and adequacy of coverage rated by those who received it

TOPIC	% WHO RECEIVED COVERAGE N=196	% OF THOSE WHO RECEIVED COVERAGE WHO THOUGHT IT ADEQUATE OR EXTENSIVE^*
1. Diagnosis of ID	89.3	76.7
2. Diagnosis of mental illness or behaviour disorders in people with ID	86.2	61.6
3. Psychiatric and behavioural phenotypes associated with specific ID	76.3	69.5
4. Communication disorders in people with ID	75.1	74.8
5. Care of adults with ID	71.0	65.5
6. Medication as an intervention (for people with dual diagnoses)	67.1	51.8
7. Special strategies for communicating with people with communication problems due to stroke, head injury, English as a second language, hearing impairment, or ID	64.5	76.0
8. Your own response and attitudes toward disability generally	62.7	78.1
9. Care of young children with ID	49.1	61.0
10. Care of adolescents with ID	42.0	51.4
11. Care of older adults and elderly people with ID	40.8	48.5
12. Psychotherapy as an intervention (for people with dual diagnoses)	37.9	46.9

↵* For every topic, fewer than 5% of participants who received training rated the topic as covered extensively.

Table 3

Views on ways training in care of people with intellectual disabilities (ID) could be improved: N = 194.

WAYS TRAINING COULD BE IMPROVED	N (%)
Adding clinical contact with patients	136 (70.1)
Allotting more curriculum time to care of people with ID	111 (57.2)
Having more parent or self-advocate guest lecturers	79 (40.7)
Having more specialist guest lecturers	64 (33.0)
Adding visits to community group homes	61 (31.4)
Adding orientation to available services and agencies	56 (28.9)
Adding visits to people with ID at their workplaces	45 (23.2)
Covering more current content	35 (18.0)
Having better prepared instructors	24 (12.4)