Background Equal access to mainstream healthcare services for people with intellectual disabilities (ID) still requires attention. Although recent studies suggest that health professionals hold positive attitudes towards people with ID, stigmatising attitudes may influence their efforts to serve people with ID in community healthcare practice. To stimulate inclusion in mainstream healthcare services, this systematic review focussed on barriers in attitudes of mainstream health professionals towards people with ID. Method Five electronic databases were systematically searched and references in full text articles were checked for studies published in the English language between January 1994 and January 2016. A social-psychological triad of cognitive, affective and behavioural dimensions of stigmatising attitudes is used to structure and discuss the results. Results The literature search generated 2190 records with 30 studies that passed our exclusion

No abstract

Objectives: Care providers are key agents in the lives of individuals with an intellectual disability (ID). The quality of their support can be affected by manifestations of stigma. This scoping review was conducted to explore studies that provide indications of care providers' stigmatization of people with ID. Methods: A structured search was made in four databases to identify relevant studies in English-language peer-reviewed journals. Records were systematically and independently screened by the researchers. Results: The 40 articles included in this review were mainly conducted in Western countries and used Likerttype self-report measures of explicit attitudes. Stigmatization seemed more distinct concerning people with high support needs. The few studies on public stigma preliminary suggest that staff may also stigmatize people with ID based on other social identities. Regarding the support of structural stigma, staff reported skepticism regarding community inclusion for people with high support needs, and tended to be ambivalent about the protection-or-empowerment balance in the support of people with ID. Possible indications of stigmatization regarding sexuality were found on specific issues, such as self-determination and privacy. Agreement of staff with certain rights did not necessarily lead to staff acting in accordance with such rights. Conclusion: Indications of stigmatization of people with ID by care providers were found. Stigmatizing attitudes might affect the quality of care providers' support. Potential leads for future interventions concern creating awareness, sharing power, addressing diagnostic overshadowing, and providing explicit policy translations. Directions for future research concern strengthening the methodology of studies and enriching the studied topics.

The fact that staff attitudes and awareness or clients' perspectives were not among the main goals of the training studies suggests that recent views of effective treatment of CB are not yet the object of scientific study. Given the acknowledgment of these aspects, it is warranted that future research focuses upon these recent insights.

Reidsma (2020) Comparing a playful interactive product to watching television: an exploratory study for people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities,