Table_2_Scoping review of dual-task interference in individuals with intellectual disability.pdf

Dual-task paradigms can provide insights on the structures and mechanisms underlying information processing and hold diagnostic, prognostic, and rehabilitative value for populations with cognitive deficits such as in individuals with intellectual disability (ID). In this paradigm, two tasks are performed separately (single-task context) and concurrently (dual-task context). The change in performance from single- to dual-task context represents dual-task interference. Findings from dual-task studies have been largely inconsistent on whether individuals with ID present with dual-task-specific deficits. The current review aimed to map the published literature on dual-task methods and pattern of dual-task interference in individuals with ID. A scoping review based on Arksey and O’Malley’s five-stage methodological framework was performed. Seventeen electronic databases and registries were searched to identify relevant studies, including gray literature. Charted data from included studies were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. PRISMA guidelines informed the reporting of this review. Twenty-two studies involving 1,102 participants (656 with ID and 446 without ID) met the review’s inclusion criteria. Participants in the included studies were heterogeneous in sex, age (range 3–59 years), etiology and ID severity. Included studies characterized their ID-sample in different ways, most commonly using intelligence quotient (IQ) scores. Other measures of intellectual function (e.g., mental age, ID severity, verbal and/or visuospatial ability scores) were also used, either solely or in combination with IQ. Methods of dual-task testing varied across studies, particularly in relation to dual-task combinations, equation of single-task performance between groups, measurement and reporting of dual-task performance for each single-task, and task priority instructions. Thematic content of the included studies were: (1) structural interference to dual-tasking; (2) etiology-based differences in dual-tasking; (3) gait and balance dual-task performance; (4) testing executive function using dual-task paradigms; and (5) training effect on dual-task performance. Although the evidence consistently supported the intact dual-tasking ability of individuals with ID, the pattern of dual-task interference was inconsistent. Likewise, the evidence was inconclusive regarding dual-task deficit specific to individuals with ID because of heterogeneity in dual-task study designs among included studies.

双任务范式（dual-task paradigms）可揭示信息加工的底层结构与机制，同时对智力障碍（intellectual disability, ID）群体等认知缺陷人群具有诊断、预后及康复价值。该范式中，两项任务会分别在单独任务情境（single-task context）下完成，也会在双任务情境（dual-task context）下同步执行。从单独任务情境到双任务情境下的作业表现变化，即为双任务干扰（dual-task interference）。现有双任务研究针对ID群体是否存在特异性双任务缺陷的结论尚未达成一致。本综述旨在梳理现有关于ID群体双任务方法及双任务干扰模式的已发表文献。本研究采用基于Arksey与O’Malley五阶段方法学框架的范围综述（scoping review）方法。研究检索了17个电子数据库与注册库，以筛选相关研究，其中包括灰色文献（gray literature）。对纳入研究的图表化提取数据开展了定量与定性分析。本综述的报告遵循优先报告系统综述与元分析条目（PRISMA）指南。最终共有22项研究符合本综述的纳入标准，共纳入1102名参与者，其中656名ID患者、446名非ID参与者。纳入研究的参与者在性别、年龄（3~59岁）、病因及ID严重程度方面均存在异质性。纳入研究对ID样本的特征界定方式各不相同，最常用的指标为智商（intelligence quotient, IQ）得分；此外也有研究单独或联合智商得分，采用心理年龄、ID严重程度、言语及/或视空间能力得分等其他智力功能评估指标。不同研究的双任务测试方法存在显著差异，尤其体现在双任务组合方式、组间单独任务作业表现的匹配校准、单项任务下双任务表现的测量与报告，以及任务优先级指导语设置等方面。纳入研究的主题内容涵盖以下5类：(1) 双任务作业的结构性干扰；(2) 基于病因的双任务作业差异；(3) 步态与平衡双任务作业表现；(4) 采用双任务范式评估执行功能（executive function）；(5) 双任务作业表现的训练效应。尽管现有证据一致表明ID群体的双任务作业能力完好，但双任务干扰的模式仍存在不一致性。同样，由于纳入研究的双任务研究设计存在异质性，现有证据仍无法明确ID群体是否存在特异性双任务缺陷。