The attitudes of teachers toward intellectual disability (ID) contribute to an effective school inclusion of students with ID, thereby enhancing their quality of life. The present study was aimed at investigating the attitude differences toward ID of mainstream and special-education teachers in Italy and the general and specific teachers’ characteristics most related to these attitudes. An online version of the Attitudes toward Intellectual Disability (ATTID) questionnaire was filled by 307 mainstream teachers and 237 special-education teachers. The findings show that special-education teachers held more positive attitudes. Specific ATTID dimensions were positively affected for both types of teachers by previous training in special education/ID, perceived support, and promotion of positive attitudes toward ID, in addition to the quality of relationships with individuals with ID, while they were positively affected for special-education teachers by perceived efficacy of ID knowledge. No or very limited effects were observed for previous experience in teaching students with typical development or ID (even with severe/profound ID). Fostering resources to provide teachers with high-quality training, support, and resources and strategies to promote positive attitudes toward ID seems a relevant approach leading to favorable attitudes, thereby improving the quality of life of students with ID.

We compared the inter-method differences shown by control materials and by patients' sera for the measurement of some plasma proteins in the same pair of analytical systems. Sets of 100 to 110 samples of patients' sera and of 18-19 control materials, including the recently available CRM 470, were assayed with up to five automatic analytical systems, in two different experiments. About 5500 values were produced and assessed statistically. Materials (either patients' sera or control materials) were considered non-commutable (i. e. exhibiting significantly different inter-method behaviour) when their distance from the regression line in a stated pair of methods exceeded 3 standard deviations. According to this criterion, less than 1.5% of the patients' sera, and an even lower proportion of control materials were non-commutable. However, the inter-method behaviour of control materials was usually slightly different from that of patients' sera. Some systematic inter-method difference in the measurements on patients' sera may therefore exist, even though inter-method equivalence has been demonstrated with control materials.