Background It is unclear whether the limitations of young persons with a mild intellectual disability or borderline intellectual functioning preclude feasibility of the daily diary method. Method For 60 consecutive days, 50 participants (Mage = 21.4, 56% male) who receive care in an ambulatory, residential, or juvenile detention setting, self‐rated both standardised and personalised diary questions through an app. Diary entries were used for feedback in treatment. Interviews were used to explore acceptability. Results Average compliance was 70.4%, while 26% of participants dropped out. Compliance was good in ambulatory (88.9%) and residential care (75.6%), but not in the juvenile detention setting (19.4%). The content of self‐selected diary items varied widely. Participants deemed the method acceptable. Conclusions Daily monitoring is feasible for individuals with a mild intellectual disability or borderline intellectual functioning receiving ambulatory or residential care, and can provide scientists and practitioners with important insights into day‐to‐day behavioural patterns.

Despite the overall consensus about the advantages of ecological momentary assessment, there is a need for information on how this method would fit with target groups with vulnerabilities that may potentially interfere with its feasibility. In this study, the feasibility of a daily diary protocol is therefore explored for adolescents and young adults with a mild intellectual disability or borderline intellectual functioning (MID-BIF). Once per day for 60 consecutive days, 50 participants with MID-BIF (Mage = 21.4, 56% male) from either an ambulatory, residential, or juvenile detention care setting, could self-rate a set of standardized and personalized diary questions through an app. Diary answers were channeled back to care professionals throughout the 60-day diary period, to be used as feedback in the participant’s treatment. A follow-up interview was conducted to explore the method’s acceptability among participants. The mean compliance rate was 70.4% and 26% participants dropped out. Compliance rates were good for participants who received ambulatory (88.9%) or residential care (75.6%), but not for participants who were detained in the juvenile detention center (19.4%). Participants who answered diaries on a group-owned device were significantly less compliant than those who could answer diaries on their own mobile phone. Interviews revealed that participants in all care settings deemed the method acceptable. Daily monitoring is a feasible and acceptable data collection method for individuals with MID-BIF who receive ambulatory or residential care, and can provide research and practice with important insights into day-to-day behavioral patterns.

No abstract

Aims To assess the effectiveness of Take it personal!, a prevention programme for individuals with mild intellectual disabilities and borderline intellectual functioning (MID‐BIF) and substance use (SU). The prevention programme aims to reduce SU (alcohol, cannabis and illicit drugs) among experimental to problematic substance users. Design A quasi‐experimental design with two arms and a 3‐month follow‐up. Setting Adolescents were recruited from 14 treatment centres in the Netherlands specialized in offering intra‐ and extramural care for people with MID‐BIF and behavioural problems. Participants Data were collected from 66 individuals with MID‐BIF assigned either to the intervention condition (n = 34) or to the control condition (n = 32). Interventions Take it personal! was designed to target four personality traits: sensation‐seeking, impulsive behaviour, anxiety sensitivity and negative thinking. For each of these profiles, interventions were developed that were structurally the same but contained different personality‐specific materials, games and exercises. The control group received care as usual. Measurements Primary outcomes at 3‐month follow‐up were frequency of SU, severity of SU and binge drinking. Results Results showed intervention effects for SU frequency (F(1, 50.43) = 9.27, P = 0.004) and binge drinking (F(1, 48.02) = 8.63, P = 0.005), but not for severity of SU (F(1, 42.09) = 2.20, P = 0.145). Conclusions A prevention programme to reduce substance use among experimental to problematic users with mild intellectual disabilities and borderline intellectual functioning helped participants to decrease substance use frequency and binge drinking.