complications of diabetes and treatment satisfaction. Following the procedure for a systematic review this paper may contribute to a balanced evaluation of the need and effectiveness of IIPs. A pre-specified, registered protocol (CRD42012002150) was followed. Studies investigating all diabetes populations and types of IIPs were considered eligible. The sensitive search strategy was developed in collaboration with a clinical librarian and contents experts. PUBMED, MEDLINE, CENTRAL EMBASE, trial registries, and other databases were searched. References were screened independently by two authors, and decisions on study selection were recorded. Of the 1,703 references screened, 362 were assessed as potentially eligible. Ninety-four were identified as studies using IIPs. Fifteen papers, together reporting on four-randomized trials, and eight cohorts were included. Narrative analysis is provided, and data tables are available. CIPII by way of IIPs is effective in lowering HbA1c levels and reducing hypoglycaemic events. Superiority of IIP treatment is likely related to patient characteristics, one subgroup being patients unable to acquire satisfactory glycaemic control with subcutaneous insulin treatment. Higher treatment satisfaction was also reported for this subgroup. For these patients, risk of morbidity may be considered acceptable. Patients' perspectives, influence on quality of life, and possible other outcomes should also be considered important factors in weighing individual benefits and risks. A more uniform method of reporting would help strengthen the evidence base.

No abstract

People with mild intellectual disabilities are more vulnerable to become victims of crime. Victims with intellectual disabilities can face attitudinal, procedural and practical barriers within the justice system. This exploratory study looked at obstacles encountered by victims of crime with mild intellectual disabilities in effectuating their rights, their vulnerability to secondary victimization and ways to support them. In 2014, 35 respondents from across the Dutch justice system and 10 respondents with mild intellectual disabilities-expertise were interviewed. Inductive and deductive content analysis was carried out. Resonance of findings was checked in an expert meeting. Findings: Three major problems were identified: (1) victims' incomprehension about the process and the proceedings; (2) victims' difficulty meeting system requirements and expectations; and (3) impact of prejudices concerning mild intellectual disabilities. A system adequately set up to deal with victims with mild intellectual disabilities could ease these difficulties. However, additional problems were identified, namely: (1) limited recognition of mild intellectual disabilities; (2) insufficient knowledge and understanding of consequences of mild intellectual disabilities; (3) issues related to accessing and accepting support; (4) communication unsuited for victims' reading and comprehension-level. These problems influence the ability of victims with mild

Purpose In the Netherlands, the Screener for Intelligence and Learning Disabilities (SCIL) was developed to aid recognition of mild to borderline intellectual disability (MBID) early in the criminal justice system or health-care trajectory. In situations where physically meeting the suspect or client is not feasible, administration of the SCIL using a video-link might be a solution. This paper aims to examine whether the SCIL is still reliable when administered remotely instead of face-to-face. Design/methodology/approach The SCIL was administered twice to a total of 89 respondents: once face-to-face, once using a video link, in varying order and with an interval of at least six weeks. A laptop with a Skype connection was used for the remote administration, while an assistant was present to make sure the respondents did not have to perform technical actions. After the second SCIL administration, respondents were asked to answer a series of evaluation questions. Findings Respondents were generally satisfied with both methods of administration of the SCIL. However, they were in general more positive about face-to-face administration. Nevertheless, most respondents would be willing to undergo administration through video-link in future. On average, respondents scored slightly lower on the SCIL when administered remotely (µ = 16.31, SE = 0 0.77) than with face-to-face administration (µ = 16.94, SE = 0.78), t(88) = 2.47, p = 0 0.015. Calculation of the reliability of the assessment “suspected MBID” showed a (linear weighted) Kappa of 0.77, p = 0.000, 95% RI: 0.64-0.90. Originality/value The results of this study show that with some caution, the SCIL can be administered remotely. When doing this, the SCIL will only lead to a small number of respondents being wrongly labelled as “suspected MBID”.