Background The increased life expectancy of people with intellectual disability intensifies the need for age‐specific support. Research on effects of support strategies on quality of life (QoL) of these people remains scattered. Methods A systematic search of peer‐reviewed publications since 1995 was performed, with participants having intellectual disability and being aged ≥50 years. Studies include experimental, observational and exploratory designs, analysing links between support strategies and QoL outcomes. The present authors adopted a narrative approach. Results The present authors found 73 articles, assessed their quality, thematically categorized interventions into 12 themes, and listed them with their stated relationships to QoL. Conclusions The studies indicated the importance of funding, provision and organization of services/personnel, education, and cooperation among different support systems. The provision of good housing or activities, support when these provisions change, provision of (mental) health care, dementia care and end‐of‐life care, life story work, future planning and support for (I)ADLs are crucial.

The present study examines to what extent two core characteristics of the quality of life (QoL) construct were incorporated in the field of autism: (1) its subjective nature; and (2) its multidimensionality. Therefore, we reviewed 174 articles examining QoL in individuals with autism. The review showed parents reporting a lower QoL compared with autistic individuals themselves, especially on internal domains. This may suggest different expectations about what a good QoL may entail. Such an underestimation of QoL by others is commonly observed in individuals with disabilities (the so-called 'disability paradox'). For the multidimensionality of the QoL construct, our findings suggest that the narrower (and more unidimensional) construct of health-related QoL is often measured instead of QoL. Additionally, a substantial proportion of items did not measure QoL, but they evaluated characteristics that may or may not have an impact on QoL. Researchers and clinicians should be aware that QoL domains are selected and operationalized differently by different instruments. QoL may benefit from an exclusive focus on subjective aspects, which can be measured alongside more normative, objective characteristics of individuals or their environment.This invited review is commented on by Higashida on page 934 of this issue.

Purpose People with intellectual disability are reported to encounter many negative life events during their increasingly long lives. In the absence of protective elements, these may cause toxic stress and trauma. Given the reported negative effects of such adverse events on their quality of life (QoL), the perspective of older people with intellectual disability themselves may be of relevance. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach The authors questioned nine participants with mild intellectual disability, aged 61–88 years old, in four 90-min focus group sessions and thematically analysed the data. Findings Many recent and bygone negative life events still weighed heavily on the participants. Negative interactions, experiences of loss, lack of control and awareness of one’s disability caused stress. Their emotional response contrasted with their contentment, compliance and resilience. Having (had) good relationships, having learnt coping skills, remaining active, talking about past experiences and feeling free of pain, safe, well supported, capable, respected and involved seemed to heighten resilience and protect participants from toxic stress. Research limitations/implications Monitoring and preventing adverse (childhood) experiences, supporting active/emotional coping strategies, psychotherapy and life story work may facilitate coping with negative events and enhance QoL of elderly people with intellectual disability. Originality/value Elderly people with mild intellectual disability run a higher risk of experiencing (early) adverse events in life. They are very capable of talking about their experiences, QoL, and the support they need. Focus groups were a reliable method to capture their insights.