Sex education for individuals with intellectual disabilities is important. However, our knowledge about effective methods for teaching sex education to this population is limited. We report the results of a systematic review identifying methods for sex education programs aimed at individuals with intellectual disabilities. In all, 20 articles were included that met the criteria set in terms of topic-the effectiveness of sex education programs-and population of interest-individuals with intellectual disabilities. In these articles, methods for increasing knowledge and for improving skills and attitudes were reported. However, the studies revealed that generalization of skills to real-life situations was often not achieved. There are indications that the maintenance of knowledge and skills still needs extra attention. Moreover, detailed descriptions of the program materials, program goals, and methods used in the programs were often lacking in the reports. Although there is some evidence for methods that may improve knowledge, attitudes, and skills with regard to sex education aimed at individuals with intellectual disabilities, due to the lack of detailed descriptions provided it is unclear under which conditions these methods work. We therefore suggest that authors provide additional detail about methods in future publications or in online supplements.
Existing sex education programmes have failed in involving people with intellectual disabilities in the development of these programmes. Not involving the target population decreases the likelihood that the sex education programme will be effective. This study was conducted to assess the perspectives of people with intellectual disabilities on several sexuality-related topics. Semi-structured interviews were held with 20 people with intellectual disabilities covering topics such as: sex education, relationships, sex, social media, parenthood and support. The reported frequency of sex education the participants receive is low. Their knowledge regarding sex education is mainly limited to topics such as safe sex, contraception and STI’s and tends to be superficial. Additionally, knowledge on safe sex does not always translate to safe sex behaviour. Finally, relationships are important for most participants; mainly because they don’t want to be alone. Findings from both this study and literature shows that there seems to be a need for high quality sex education. Topics to consider to include are: online relationships, social media and parenthood. It would also be beneficial to focus on sexuality-related skills. Finally, to increase the effectiveness of a sex education programme, it is advisable that a theory-and evidence-based framework, such as Intervention Mapping, is used for its development.
BackgroundPeople with intellectual disabilities face barriers that affect their sexual health. Sex education programmes have been developed by professionals working in the field of intellectual disabilities with the aim to overcome these barriers. The aim of this study was to explore the development of these programmes.MethodsSex education programmes geared to people with intellectual disabilities were examined in the context of the Intervention Mapping protocol. Data were obtained via interviews with the programme developers.ResultsAll programmes lack specific programme outcomes, do not have a theoretical basis, did not involve members of relevant groups in the development process and lack systematic evaluation.ConclusionsBased on our findings and the literature, we conclude that these programmes are unlikely to be effective. Future programmes should be developed using a more systematic and theory- and evidence-based approach.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.