AUTHOR=Pineda Roi Charles , Krampe Ralf Th , Vanlandewijck Yves , Van Biesen Debbie 

TITLE=Scoping review of dual-task interference in individuals with intellectual disability

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Psychology

VOLUME=Volume 14 - 2023

YEAR=2023

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1223288

DOI=10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1223288

ISSN=1664-1078

ABSTRACT=Dual-task paradigms can provide insight on the structures and mechanisms underlying information processing and hold diagnostic, prognostic, and rehabilitative value for populations with cognitive deficits such as 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 grey literature. Charted data from included studies were analysed 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), aetiology and ID severity. Included studies characterised 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 related to dual-task combinations, equation of single-task performance between groups, measurement 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) aetiology-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.