Interventions that support adults with brain injuries, learning disabilities and autistic spectrum disorders in dating or romantic relationships: a systematic review

References

• Anderson Brantlinger E. Teachers' perceptions of the parenting abilities of their secondary students with mild mental retardation. Remedial Spec Educ. 1988;9(4):31–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tullis CA, Zangrillo AN. Sexuality education for adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorders. Psychol Schs. 2013;50(9):866–875.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fulford C, Cobigo V. Friendships and intimate relationships among people with intellectual disabilities: a thematic synthesis. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2018;31(1):e18–e35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McColl MA, Carlson P, Johnston J, et al. The definition of community integration: perspectives of people with brain injuries. Brain Inj. 1998;12(1):15–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organisation. Rehabilitation for persons with traumatic brain injury. Drucker Brain Injury Centre, Moss Rehab Hospital, Pennsylvania, USA: World Health Organisation; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• The Scottish Executive. The same as you? A review of services for people with learning disabilities. Edinburgh: The Scottish Executive; 2000 [accessed 2019 Sep 21]. Available from: https://www2.gov.scot/resource/doc/1095/0001661.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Department for Health. Valuing people now: a new three-year strategy for people with learning disabilities. London: HMSO; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Blanchett WJ, Wolfe PS. A review of sexuality education curricula: meeting the sexuality education needs of individuals with moderate and severe intellectual disabilities. Res Pract Persons Severe Disabl. 2002;27(1):43–57.
   Google Scholar
• Curtin M, Jones J, Tyson GA, et al. Outcomes of participation objective, participation subjective (POPS) measure following traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2011;25(3):266–273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKenzie A, Fountain R, Alfred D, et al. Quality of life and adaptations for traumatic brain injury survivors: assessment of the disability centrality model. J Rehabil. 2015;81(3):9–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Steinbuchel N, Wilson L, Gibbons H, et al. Quality of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI): scale validity and correlates of quality of life. J Neurotrauma. 2010;27(7):1157–1165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Steinbüchel N, Wilson L, Gibbons H, et al. Quality of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI): scale development and metric properties. J Neurotrauma. 2010;27(7):1167–1185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy K, Howard S, Ashman T, et al. Romantic involvement, sexuality and quality of life in persons with traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(10):E14.
   Google Scholar
• Neuman R, Reiter S. Couple relationships as perceived by people with intellectual disability - implications for quality of life and self-concept. Int J Dev Disabil. 2017;63(3):138–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stokes M, Newton N, Kaur A. Stalking, and social and romantic functioning among adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder. J Autism Dev Disord. 2007;37(10):1969–1986.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald S, Honan C, Kelly M, et al. Disorders of social cognition and social behaviour following severe TBI. In: McDonald S, Togher L, Code C, editors. Social and communication disorders following traumatic brain injury. 2nd ed. Sussex: Psychology Press; 2014. p. 119–159.
   Google Scholar
• Neumann DM, Zupan B, Eberle R. Social cognition. In: Silver JM, McAllister TW, Arciniegas DB, editors. The textbook of traumatic brain injury. Washington: American Psychiatric Association Publishing; 2019. p. 281–298.
   Google Scholar
• McGrath M, Lever S, McCluskey A, et al. How is sexuality after stroke experienced by stroke survivors and partners of stroke survivors? A systematic review of qualitative studies. Clin Rehabil. 2019;33(2):293–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson G. Addressing the sexual concerns of persons with traumatic brain injury in rehabilitation settings: a framework for action. Brain Impair. 2001;2(2):97–108.
   Google Scholar
• Krantz G, Tolan V, Pontarelli K, et al. What do adolescents with developmental disabilities learn about sexuality and dating? A potential role for occupational therapy. OJOT. 2016;4(2):1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Evans A, Rodgers ME. Protection for whom? The right to a sexual or intimate relationship. J Learn Disabil. 2000;4(3):237–245.
   Google Scholar
• Chrastina J, Večeřová H. Supporting sexuality in adults with intellectual disability - a short review. Sex Disabil. 2020;38(2):285–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockhart K, Guerin S, Shanahan S, et al. Expanding the test of counterfeit deviance: Are sexual knowledge, experience and needs a factor in the sexualised challenging behaviour of adults with intellectual disability? Res Dev Disabil. 2010;31(1):117–130.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ylvisaker M, Feeney TJ. Collaborative brain injury intervention: positive everyday routines. London: Singular Publishing Group Inc: London; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Gill CJ, Sander AM, Robins N, et al. Exploring experiences of intimacy from the viewpoint of individuals with traumatic brain injury and their partners. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2011;26(1):56–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris P, Brady C. Attitudes of speech and language therapists to intimate relationships among people with learning difficulties: an exploratory study. Br J Learn Disabil. 1995;23(4):160–163.
   Google Scholar
• Callaway L, Sloan S, Winkler D. Maintaining and developing friendships following severe traumatic brain injury: Principles of occupational therapy practice. Aust Occ Ther J. 2005;52(3):257–260.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy K. Dating as an occupation: swipe right for occupational therapy. Collected Faculty and Staff Scholarship. DUC. 2018;329:12–15.
   Google Scholar
• Dyer K, das Nair R. Talking about sex after traumatic brain injury: perceptions and experiences of multidisciplinary rehabilitation professionals. Disabil Rehabil. 2014;36(17):1431–1438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum T, Vadas D, Kalichman L. Sexual function in post-stroke patients: considerations for rehabilitation. J Sex Med. 2014;11(1):15–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ylvsaker M, Feeney T. What I really want is a girlfriend: meaningful social interaction after traumatic brain injury. Br Injury Source. 2001;5:12–17.
   Google Scholar
• Kavale KA, Forness SR. Social skill deficits and learning disabilities: a meta-analysis. J Learn Disabil. 1996;29(3):226–237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emerson E, Heslop P. A working definition of learning disabilities. Durham: Improving Health and Lives: Learning Disabilities Observatory; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas J, Brunton J, Graziosi S. EPPI-Reviewer 4.0: software for research synthesis. EPPI-Centre Software. London: Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, et al. Better reporting of interventions: Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. Br Med J. 2014;348:1–12.
   Google Scholar
• PEDro, Physiotherapy Evidence Database. PEDro Scale; 1999 [accessed 2019 Sep 21]. Available from: https://www.pedro.org.au/english/downloads/pedro-scale/
   Google Scholar
• Maher CG, Sherrington C, Herbert RD, et al. Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomised controlled trials. Phys Ther. 2003;83(8):713–721.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Morton NA. The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study. Aust J Physiother. 2009;55(2):129–133.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teasell R, Bayona N, Marshall S, et al. A systematic review of the rehabilitation of moderate to severe acquired brain injuries. Brain Inj. 2007;21(2):107–112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Quality assessment for before-after studies with no control group; 2014 [accessed 2019 Sep 21]. Available from: https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools
   Google Scholar
• Hashida R, Kawaguchi T, Bekki M, et al. Aerobic Vs. resistance exercise in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review. J Hepatol. 2017;66(1):142–152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bickerdike L, Booth A, Wilson PM, et al. Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence. BMJ Open. 2017;7:1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tate RL, Rosenkoetter U, Wakim D, Sigmundsdottir, et al. The risk-of-bias in n-of-1 trials (RoBiNT) scale: an expanded manual for the critical appraisal of single-case reports. St Leonards (NSW): John Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research.
   Google Scholar
• Turville ML, Cahill LS, Matyas TA, et al. The effectiveness of somatosensory retraining for improving sensory function in the arm following stroke: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil. 2019;33(5):834–846.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McInerney MS, Reddihough DS, Carding PN, et al. Behavioural interventions to treat drooling in children with neurodisability: a systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2019;61(1):39–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meulenbroek P, Ness B, Lemoncello R, et al. Social communication following traumatic brain injury part two: identifying effective treatment ingredients. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2019;21(2):128–142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward KM, Windsor R, Atkinson JP. A process evaluation of the friendships and dating program for adults with developmental disabilities: measuring the fidelity of program delivery. Res Dev Disabil. 2012;33(1):69–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward KM, Atkinson JP, Smith CA, et al. A friendships and dating program for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities: a formative evaluation. Intellect Dev Disabil. 2013;51(1):22–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreutzer JS, Marwitz JH, Sima AP, et al. Evaluation of a brief, skill-building, supportive, and educational intervention for couples after brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2019;35(3):175–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham KM, Kreutzer JS, Marwitz JH, et al. Can a couples’ intervention reduce unmet needs and caregiver burden after brain injury? Rehabil Psychol. 2019. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000300
   Google Scholar
• Backhaus S, Neumann D, Parrott D, et al. Investigation of a new couples intervention for individuals with brain injury: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100(2):195–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mueser KT, Valenti-Hein D, Yarnold PR. Dating-skills groups for the developmentally disabled. Social skills and problem-solving versus relaxation training. Behav Modif. 1987;11(2):200–228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valenti-Hein DC, Yarnold PR, Mueser KT. Evaluation of the dating skills program for improving heterosocial interactions in people with mental retardation. Behav Modif. 1994;18(1):32–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cunningham A, Sperry L, Brady MP, Peluso,   et al. The effects of a romantic relationship treatment options for adults with autism spectrum disorder. Couns Outcome Res Evaluation. 2016;7(2):99–110.
   Google Scholar
• Backhaus S, Neumann D, Parrot D, et al. Examination of an intervention to enhance relationship satisfaction after brain injury: a feasibility study. Brain Inj. 2016;30(8):975–985.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeates G, Edwards A, Murray C, et al. The use of emotionally-focused couples therapy (EFT) for survivors of acquired brain injury with social cognition and executive functioning impairments, and their partners: a case series analysis. Neuro-Disabil Psychother. 2013;1(2):151–197.
   Google Scholar
• Chandler RJ, Swift C, Goodman W. Treating online inappropriate sexualised behaviour. J Intellect Disabil. 2016;7(3):151–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valentich M, Gripton J. Facilitating the sexual integration of the head-inured person in the community. Sex Disabil. 1984;7(1–2):28–42.
   Google Scholar
• Gutman SA, Leger DL. Enhancement of one-to-one interpersonal skills necessary to initiate and maintain intimate relationships: a frame of reference for adults having sustained traumatic brain injury. Occup Ther Ment Health. 1997;13(2):51–67.
   Google Scholar
• Busby DM, Christensen C, Crane DR, et al. A revision of the dyadic adjustment scale for use with distressed and nondistressed couples: construct hierarchy and multidimensional scales. J Marital Fam Ther. 1995;21(3):289–308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss RL, Cerreto MC. The marital status inventory: development of a measure of dissolution potential. Am J Fam Ther. 1980;8(2):80–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwitz J. The family needs questionnaire. The Centre for Outcome Measurement in Brain Injury; 2000 [accessed 2020 May 17]. Available from: http://www.tbims.org/combi/fnq
   Google Scholar
• Bachner YG, O'Rourke N. Reliability generalization of responses by care providers to the Zarit Burden Interview. Aging Ment Health. 2007;11(6):678–685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreutzer JS, Marwitz JH, Seel R, et al. Validation of a neurobehavioural functioning inventory for adults with traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;77(2):116–124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spanier GB. Measuring dyadic adjustment: new scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. J Marriage Fam. 1976;38(1):15–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norton R. Measuring marital quality: a critical look at the developmental variable. J Marriage Fam. 1983;45(1):141–151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The empirical basis for Gottman method couples therapy. The Gottman Institute; 2019 [accessed 2019 Sep 21]. Available from: https://www.gottman.com
   Google Scholar
• Foxx RM, McMorrow MJ, Schloss CN. Stacking the deck: teaching social skills to retarded adults with a modified table game. J Appl Behav Anal. 1983;16(2):157–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson D, Friend R. Measurement of social-evaluative anxiety. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1969;33(4):448–457.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson JP, Ward KM. The development of an assessment of interpersonal violence for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Sex Disabil. 2012;30(3):301–309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Constantino JN, Gruber CP. Social responsiveness scale. 2nd ed. LA (California): Western Psychological Services; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Skinner R, et al. The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): evidence from asperger syndrome/high-functioning. J Autism Dev Disord. 2001;31(1):5–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levenson RW, Gottman JM. Toward the assessment of social competence. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1978;46(3):453–462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S. The empathy quotient: an investigation of adults with asperger syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences. J Autism Dev Disord. 2004;34(2):163–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutrona CE, Russell DW. The provisions of social relationships and adaptation to stress. Adv Pers Relationships. 1987;1:37–67.
   Google Scholar
• Westbrook D, Kennerly H, Kirk J. An introduction to cognitive behaviour therapy: skills and application. London: Sage Publications; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Koerner K. Doing dialectical behaviour therapy: a practical guide. New York (NY): The Guilford Press; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• The Gottman Method. The Gottman Institute; 2019 [accessed 2020 Jan 03]. Available from: https://www.gottman.com/about/the-gottman-method/
   Google Scholar
• Bruder C, Kroese BS. The efficacy of interventions designed to prevent and protect people with intellectual disabilities from sexual abuse: a review of the literature. J Adult Prot. 2005;7(2):13–27.
   Google Scholar
• Ortwein MV, B. G. Ready For G. Love: relationship enhancement for singles and solos. Frankfort (KY): Relationship Press; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Mintah K, Parlow SE. Are you flirting with me? Autistic traits, theory of mind, and inappropriate courtship. Pers Individ Differ. 2018;128:100–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sala G, Hooley M, Attwood T, et al. Autism and intellectual disability: a systematic review of sexuality and relationship education. Sex Disabil. 2019;37(3):353–382.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rege A. What’s love got to do with it? Exploring online dating scams and identity fraud. Int J Cyber Criminol. 2009;3(2):494–512.
   Google Scholar
• Whitty MT, Buchanan T. The online romance scam: a serious cybercrime. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2012;15(3):181–183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang J, Stringhini G, Yong P. Quit playing games with my heart: understanding online dating scams. Proceedings of the International Conference on Detection of Intrusions, Malware and Vulnerability Assessment (DIMVA); 2015. p. 216–236.
   Google Scholar
• D'Cruz A-M, Ragozzino ME, Mosconi MW, et al. Reduced behavioral flexibility in autism spectrum disorders. Neuropsychology. 2013;27(2):152–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page SJ, Persch AC. Recruitment, retention, and blinding in clinical trials. Am J Occup Ther. 2013;67(2):154–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saxe A, Flanagan T. Unprepared: an appeal for sex education training for support workers of adults with developmental disabilties. Sex Disabil. 2016;34(4):443–454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolwyk RJ, Downing MG, Taffe J, et al. Assessment of sexuality following traumatic brain injury: validation of the brain injury questionnaire of sexuality. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2013;28(3):164–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Comparisons against baseline within randomised groups are often used and can be highly misleading. Trials. 2011;12:264–271.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redmond C, Larkin M, Harrop C. The personal meaning of romantic relationships for young people with psychosis. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2010;15(2):151–170.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar