Avoidable mortality, clinical outcomes and determinants of premature death among adults with severe or profound intellectual disability: A population-based analysis of mortality data in England

BACKGROUND: Adults with intellectual disabilities experience significantly worse health outcomes and die younger than people without intellectual disability. People with severe or profound intellectual disability have particularly complex health needs. However, no large-scale population-based studies have specifically examined mortality patterns and factors associated with age at death in this group. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This population-based study used data from the English Learning from Lives and Deaths (LeDeR) mortality review programme and the Office for National Statistics (ONS) between 2021 and 2023. We included 1,301 adults with severe or profound intellectual disability, 2,626 adults with mild or moderate intellectual disability, and 536,311 adults from the general population. We collected sociodemographic, clinical, and mortality data. Key outcomes included co-occurring conditions, age at death, causes of death, avoidable mortality, and years of life lost. We used Cox regression and multiple linear regression to examine factors associated with age at death. We defined avoidable deaths as deaths before the age of 75 years due to preventable or treatable causes and adjudicated them by mapping the underlying cause of death to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) list of avoidable causes of death. Adults with severe or profound intellectual disability had a significantly higher prevalence of dysphagia (63.0%), epilepsy (36.1%) and visual problems (35.9%) compared with those with mild or moderate intellectual disability (p < 0.01 for each). The median age at death was markedly lower in this group (57.9 years) compared to those with mild or moderate intellectual disability (65.0 years) and the general population (81.9 years) (p < 0.001). We classified two-fifths of deaths among adults with severe or profound intellectual disability as avoidable (39.5%), resulting in 15,059.4 years of life lost. Severe or profound intellectual disability was associated with a younger age at death (adjusted mean difference -7.17 years; 95% confidence interval [CI] [-8.16, -6.18]; p < 0.001). A key limitation is that the cohort was restricted to mortality data, meaning our findings reflect factors associated with age at death rather than mortality risk. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the urgent need for tailored public health strategies, early interventions, and integrated care models to improve clinical outcomes for individuals with severe and profound intellectual disability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS Medicine
Published
2026-08-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1005029
Primary Topic
Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Avoidable mortality, clinical outcomes and determinants of premature death among adults with severe or profound intellectual disability: A population-based analysis of mortality data in England

Umesh Chauhan, Irene Tuffrey‐Wijne, Rory Sheehan, André Strydom et al.
PLoS Medicine
Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
article

Avoidable mortality, clinical outcomes and determinants of premature death among adults with severe or profound intellectual disability: A population-based analysis of mortality data in England

Umesh Chauhan, Irene Tuffrey‐Wijne, Rory Sheehan, André Strydom, Michael Kwan Leung Yu, Adam George White, Nicholas Magill, Jonathon Ding, Lili Bokor
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adults with intellectual disabilities experience significantly worse health outcomes and die younger than people without intellectual disability. People with severe or profound intellectual disability have particularly complex health needs. However, no large-scale population-based studies have specifically examined mortality patterns and factors associated with age at death in this group. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This population-based study used data from the English Learning from Lives and Deaths (LeDeR) mortality review programme and the Office for National Statistics (ONS) between 2021 and 2023. We included 1,301 adults with severe or profound intellectual disability, 2,626 adults with mild or moderate intellectual disability, and 536,311 adults from the general population. We collected sociodemographic, clinical, and mortality data. Key outcomes included co-occurring conditions, age at death, causes of death, avoidable mortality, and years of life lost. We used Cox regression and multiple linear regression to examine factors associated with age at death. We defined avoidable deaths as deaths before the age of 75 years due to preventable or treatable causes and adjudicated them by mapping the underlying cause of death to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) list of avoidable causes of death. Adults with severe or profound intellectual disability had a significantly higher prevalence of dysphagia (63.0%), epilepsy (36.1%) and visual problems (35.9%) compared with those with mild or moderate intellectual disability (p < 0.01 for each). The median age at death was markedly lower in this group (57.9 years) compared to those with mild or moderate intellectual disability (65.0 years) and the general population (81.9 years) (p < 0.001). We classified two-fifths of deaths among adults with severe or profound intellectual disability as avoidable (39.5%), resulting in 15,059.4 years of life lost. Severe or profound intellectual disability was associated with a younger age at death (adjusted mean difference -7.17 years; 95% confidence interval [CI] [-8.16, -6.18]; p < 0.001). A key limitation is that the cohort was restricted to mortality data, meaning our findings reflect factors associated with age at death rather than mortality risk. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the urgent need for tailored public health strategies, early interventions, and integrated care models to improve clinical outcomes for individuals with severe and profound intellectual disability.

PLoS MedicineVol. 23(8)
Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust (GB), King's College London (GB), University of Lancashire (GB), South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Kingston University London (GB), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB), Kingston University (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.