No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Although "intellectual disability" has widely replaced the term "mental retardation", the debate as to whether this entity should be conceptualized as a health condition or as a disability has intensified as the revision of the World Health Organization (WHO)'s International Classification of Diseases (ICD) advances. Defining intellectual disability as a health condition is central to retaining it in ICD, with significant implications for health policy and access to health services. This paper presents the consensus reached to date by the WHO ICD Working Group on the Classification of Intellectual Disabilities. Literature reviews were conducted and a mixed qualitative approach was followed in a series of meetings to produce consensus-based recommendations combining prior expert knowledge and available evidence. The Working Group proposes replacing mental retardation with intellectual developmental disorders, defined as "a group of developmental conditions characterized by significant impairment of cognitive functions, which are associated with limitations of learning, adaptive behaviour and skills". The Working Group further advises that intellectual developmental disorders be incorporated in the larger grouping (parent category) of neurodevelopmental disorders, that current subcategories based on clinical severity (i.e., mild, moderate, severe, profound) be continued, and that problem behaviours be removed from the core classification structure of intellectual developmental disorders and instead described as associated features.

Intellectual disability originates during the developmental period and is characterized by significant limitations both in intellectual functioning and in adaptive behavior as expressed in conceptual, social, and practical adaptive skills. In this article, we present a brief history of the diagnostic criteria of intellectual disability for both the DSM-5 and AAIDD. The article also (a) provides an update of the understanding of adaptive behavior, (b) dispels two thinking errors regarding mistaken temporal or causal link between intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior, (c) explains that there is a strong correlational, but no causative, relation between intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior, and (d) asserts that once a question of determining intellectual disability is raised, both intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior are assessed and considered jointly and weighed equally in the diagnosis of intellectual disability. We discuss the problems created by an inaccurate statement that appears in the DSM-5 regarding a causal link between deficits in intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior and propose an immediate revision to remove this erroneous and confounding statement.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract