Safer Online Lives: Use of the Internet & Social Media by People With Intellectual Disabilities
NCT ID: NCT04919213
Last Updated: 2024-08-05
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
429 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2021-05-11
2024-01-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Improving Safety and Quality in Mental Healthcare
NCT04866693
Online Self-help for Students With Suicidal Ideation
NCT05636722
Protect Yourself: Abuse Prevention for People With Intellectual Disabilities
NCT03998605
Effectiveness of an Online Safety Tool for Canadian Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence
NCT02258841
Social Media, Smartphone Use and Self-harm in Young People
NCT04601220
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Benefits of the Internet: Compared to the general population, people with ID are often more likely to have narrow social networks consisting of either other people with disabilities, their families and/or their carers, usually feeling socially isolated and lonely. The internet can help people with ID form and maintain social relationships, but also gain access to expert guidance and information regarding care, health, employment etc.
Online Vulnerabilities: Previous research has identified a link between the use of internet and online risks for both people with and without ID. Such risks include abuse through online dating, being the victim of a fraud etc. Although anyone can be at risk of the above, it has been suggested that such risks are increased when individuals are particularly vulnerable to abuse. Research evidence has demonstrated that people with ID have several negative experiences online such as verbal abuse, sexual exploitation, mistreatment and violence. Furthermore, it has been shown that people with ID who have previous histories of abuse, isolation, and/or depression are more at risk of becoming victims of online sexual exploitation and abuse than others.
Acquiescence and acceptability are also very common in this population. Their desire to "fit in", be liked and willingness to please, might place people with ID in a vulnerable position. Likewise, studies have suggested that the type and severity of an ID, as well as age, could be influencing online risks. For example, people with lower IQ or with lack of social communication skills might have difficulties understanding other people's intentions, which makes them particularly vulnerable to online exploitation, abuse, theft and manipulation.
Existing Evidence: Given that only a very small amount of studies have looked at the internet use and risks for people with ID, there is no study looking at the benefits and opportunities of internet use. Therefore, there is a clear need to investigate this further. Also, all existing studies have focused on small numbers of participants leaving a clear gap in the literature. Only a small number of studies have taken into account family and paid carers' views. Even though the findings derived from these studies cannot be generalised, they act as a useful starting point to highlight the need for further exploration of internet use and online risks for people with ID.
In summary, the purpose of the proposed study is to explore the following four key areas: benefits of using the internet, barriers people with ID face, online risks and online opportunities. The study will also investigate the views (positive and negative) of different stakeholders on the issue; such as family carers, paid carers, safeguarding practitioners, police and people with ID. Furthermore, the proposed study will address the gap in the literature and enhance social care practice by highlighting the importance of providing support for use of internet in order to reduce the current 'digital divide' and also identify areas that future interventions around online safety for people with ID should target.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
CASE_ONLY
CROSS_SECTIONAL
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities
Individuals will be invited to take part in an online survey (paper version will also be available). The participants will be recruited through advertisements on relevant platforms (e.g., Facebook, Twitter) and through relevant social care organisations. The study hopes to recruit 100 individuals from all over England (UK). A subgroup will be asked if they would like to take part in a one-to-one open-ended interview (n=20) and/or in direct observations (n=30).
No interventions assigned to this group
Family carers
Family carers (n=50) of people with intellectual disabilities in England, who use the internet, will be invited to take part in an online survey. A subgroup of family carers (n=7) will be asked if they would like to take part in a focus group.
No interventions assigned to this group
Paid carers
Paid carers (n=50) of people with intellectual disabilities in England, who use the internet, will be invited to take part in an online survey. A subgroup of paid carers (n=7) will be asked if they would like to take part in a focus group.
No interventions assigned to this group
Professionals with safeguarding responsibilities
Professionals with safeguarding duties (e.g., social workers, learning disability nurses, police and safeguarding adults board members) supporting people with ID in England who use the internet will also be invited to take part in an online survey (n=50). A subgroup (n=7) from London and Kent (England, UK) will be asked if they would like to take part in a focus group.
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Carers of people with ID who use the internet.
* Safeguarding professionals working /have worked with people with ID that have been using/have used the internet.
* All participants must be based in England
Exclusion Criteria
* Participants with ID who do not have internet access or chose to not use the internet.
* Participants that do not have the capacity to consent according to the Mental Capacity Act (2005).
* Participants who are not able to communicate verbally will be excluded from the interviews, observations and focus groups; however, they will be included in the questionnaires assessments.
* Carers of people with ID who do not use the internet.
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
National Institute for Health Research, United Kingdom
OTHER_GOV
University of Kent
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Paraskevi Triantafyllopoulou, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Kent
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of Kent
Canterbury, Kent, United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Blackburn C, Read J. Using the Internet? The experiences of parents of disabled children. Child Care Health Dev. 2005 Sep;31(5):507-15. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2005.00541.x.
Didden R, Scholte RH, Korzilius H, de Moor JM, Vermeulen A, O'Reilly M, Lang R, Lancioni GE. Cyberbullying among students with intellectual and developmental disability in special education settings. Dev Neurorehabil. 2009 Jun;12(3):146-51. doi: 10.1080/17518420902971356.
Finlay WM, Lyons E. Acquiescence in interviews with people who have mental retardation. Ment Retard. 2002 Feb;40(1):14-29. doi: 10.1352/0047-6765(2002)0402.0.CO;2.
Lough E, Fisher MH. Internet use and online safety in adults with Williams syndrome. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2016 Oct;60(10):1020-30. doi: 10.1111/jir.12281. Epub 2016 May 12.
Molin M, Sorbring E, Lofgren-Martenson L. Teachers' and parents' views on the Internet and social media usage by pupils with intellectual disabilities. J Intellect Disabil. 2015 Mar;19(1):22-33. doi: 10.1177/1744629514563558. Epub 2014 Dec 17.
Normand CL, Sallafranque-St-Louis F. Cybervictimization of Young People With an Intellectual or Developmental Disability: Risks Specific to Sexual Solicitation. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2016 Mar;29(2):99-110. doi: 10.1111/jar.12163. Epub 2015 Apr 13.
Chiner, E., Gómez-Puerta, M., & Cardona-Moltó, M. C. Internet use, risks and online behaviour: The view of internet users with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers. British journal of learning disabilities. 2017; 45(3): 190-197.
Chadwick, D. D., Quinn, S., & Fullwood, C. Perceptions of the risks and benefits of Internet access and use by people with intellectual disabilities. British Journal of Learning Disabilities. 2017; 45(1): 21-31.
Ellison, B. N., Steinfield, C., & C, L. The Benefits of Facebook "Friends:" Social Capital and College Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2007; 1143-1168.
Forrester-Jones, R., Carpenter, J., Coolen-Schrijner, P., Cambridge, P., Tate, A., Beecham, J., ... & Wooff, D. The social networks of people with intellectual disability living in the community 12 years after resettlement from long-stay hospitals. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities. 2006; 19(4): 285-295.
Gravell, C. 2012. Loneliness and cruelty: people with learning disabilities and their experience of harassment, abuse and related crime in the community. London: Lemos and Crane.
Gutiérrez P, Martorell A. People with intellectual disability and ICTs. Rev. Comun. 2011; 36: 173-180.
Holmes KM, O'Loughlin N. The experiences of people with learning disabilities on social networking sites. British Journal of Learning Disabilities. 2012; 42(1): 1-5.
Kirwan G, Power A. 2013. Cybercrime: The psychology of online offenders. Cambridge: University Press.
Löfgren-Mårtenson L. Love in cyberspace: Swedish young people with intellectual disabilities and the Internet. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research. 2008; 10(2): 125-138.
Lussier-Desrochers D, Normand CL, Romero-Torres A, Lachapelle Y, Godin-Tremblay V, Dupont MÈ, ... & Bilodeau P. Bridging the digital divide for people with intellectual disability. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace. 2017; 11(1).
Meeker M, Wu L. 2018. Internet trends 2018 (Code 2018). Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com/mary-meeker-internet-trends-2018-full-slide-deck-2018-5?r=US&IR=T
Sallafranque-St-Louis F, Normand CL. From solitude to solicitation: How people with intellectual disability or autism spectrum disorder use the internet. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace. 2017; 11(1).
Steinfield C, Ellison NB, Lampe C. Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 2008; 29(6): 434-445.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
Research Project homepage
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
293445
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.