Improving the health, wellbeing and social networks by of older adults with intellectual disability: The Matilda Study

A feasibility study of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the MATILDA intervention to support older adults with intellectual disability to their improve health, wellbeing and social networks compared to usual care

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

ISRCTN

Registry ID

ISRCTN15294181

Enrollment

Registered

2022-12-20

Start date

2023-02-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-03-02

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Older adults with intellectual disability Mental and Behavioural Disorders

Interventions

Following informed consent, older adults with an intellectual disability will be randomised using a 1:1 ratio to the intervention group (Matilda) or control group, stratified by site. The randomisatio

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Mild/moderate intellectual disability 2. Living in the community with a family member(s) or in any type of community accommodation (residential/supported/shared lives) 3. 45 years old and over 4. Able to communicate verbally 5. Able to provide informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Severe/profound intellectual disability 2. Severe challenging behaviour 3. Unable to communicate verbally or in English Unable to provide consent 4. Already accessing mainstream community groups.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Feasibility is assessed using the following outcome variables: 1. Recruitment measured using data collected in the case report form (CRF) at baseline 2. Consent measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 3. Matching measured using data collected in the CRF after randomisation has taken place and during the process-evaluation interviews 4. Retention measured using data collected in the CRF at the end of the intervention at 6-months	—

Measure

Time frame

Feasibility is assessed using the following outcome variables: 1. Recruitment measured using data collected in the case report form (CRF) at baseline 2. Consent measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 3. Matching measured using data collected in the CRF after randomisation has taken place and during the process-evaluation interviews 4. Retention measured using data collected in the CRF at the end of the intervention at 6-months

—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Secondary feasibility is assessed using the following outcome variables: 1. Eligibility measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 2. Recruitment rates and pathways measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 3. Consenting rate measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 4. Randomisation process measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 5. Matching of mentors (and local community groups) and older adults with an intellectual disability measured using data collected in the CRF after randomisation has taken place, and during the process-evaluation interviews 6. Training and supervision measured using the process-evaluation interviews 7. Attendance levels measured using data collected in the CRF at 6-months post-randomisation 8. Drop-out rates measured using data collected in the CRF at 6-months post-randomisation 9. Retention of participants measured using data collected in the CRF at 6-months post-randomisation	—

Measure

Time frame

Secondary feasibility is assessed using the following outcome variables: 1. Eligibility measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 2. Recruitment rates and pathways measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 3. Consenting rate measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 4. Randomisation process measured using data collected in the CRF at baseline 5. Matching of mentors (and local community groups) and older adults with an intellectual disability measured using data collected in the CRF after randomisation has taken place, and during the process-evaluation interviews 6. Training and supervision measured using the process-evaluation interviews 7. Attendance levels measured using data collected in the CRF at 6-months post-randomisation 8. Drop-out rates measured using data collected in the CRF at 6-months post-randomisation 9. Retention of participants measured using data collected in the CRF at 6-months post-randomisation

—

Countries

England, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom

Contacts

Public ContactLaurence Taggart

l.taggart@ulster.ac.uk+44 (0)7859803478

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Mar 14, 2026