The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Measuring disability: comparing the impact of two data collection approaches on disability rates

Measuring disability: comparing the impact of two data collection approaches on disability rates
Measuring disability: comparing the impact of two data collection approaches on disability rates
The usual approach in disability surveys is to screen persons with disability upfront and then ask questions about everyday problems. The objectives of this paper are to demonstrate the impact of screeners on disability rates, to challenge the usual exclusion of persons with mild and moderate disability from disability surveys and to demonstrate the advantage of using an a posteriori cut-off. Using data of a pilot study of the WHO Model Disability Survey (MDS) in Cambodia and the polytomous Rasch model, metric scales of disability were built. The conventional screener approach based on the short disability module of the Washington City Group and the a posteriori cut-off method described in the World Disability Report were compared regarding disability rates. The screener led to imprecise rates and classified persons with mild to moderate disability as non-disabled, although these respondents already experienced important problems in daily life. The a posteriori cut-off applied to the general population sample led to a more precise disability rate and allowed for a differentiation of the performance and needs of persons with mild, moderate and severe disability. This approach can be therefore considered as an inclusive approach suitable to monitor the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
disability evaluation, international classification of functioning, disability and health, data collection, health surveys, disability surveys, screeners
1660-4601
10329-10351
Sabariego, C.
649cdf85-62d5-4eb9-b181-5f6333f02d95
Oberhauser, C.
19bd72f4-7be9-42f2-9152-b91eec5689e0
Posarac, A.
df49267f-742d-47ad-9aa2-54e41184ff1c
Bickenbach, J.
3be81bd0-7d1d-4e2a-9a98-0e1097614d96
Kostanjsek, N.
67b66f74-a7fe-424e-9692-df6980cfdfb4
Chatterji, S.
0d10ce3d-518a-4d87-a3bc-6dcb7b365ac6
Officer, A.
25da1aa8-c1ec-4725-96f8-1a17e033dd85
Coenen, M.
c5812919-8c45-4bfa-aed8-7f91ab994e14
Chhan, L.
df8b856b-d03f-43cc-b75b-69e5d1ce24e0
Cieza, A.
a0df25c5-ee2c-4580-82b3-d0a75591580e
Sabariego, C.
649cdf85-62d5-4eb9-b181-5f6333f02d95
Oberhauser, C.
19bd72f4-7be9-42f2-9152-b91eec5689e0
Posarac, A.
df49267f-742d-47ad-9aa2-54e41184ff1c
Bickenbach, J.
3be81bd0-7d1d-4e2a-9a98-0e1097614d96
Kostanjsek, N.
67b66f74-a7fe-424e-9692-df6980cfdfb4
Chatterji, S.
0d10ce3d-518a-4d87-a3bc-6dcb7b365ac6
Officer, A.
25da1aa8-c1ec-4725-96f8-1a17e033dd85
Coenen, M.
c5812919-8c45-4bfa-aed8-7f91ab994e14
Chhan, L.
df8b856b-d03f-43cc-b75b-69e5d1ce24e0
Cieza, A.
a0df25c5-ee2c-4580-82b3-d0a75591580e

Sabariego, C., Oberhauser, C., Posarac, A., Bickenbach, J., Kostanjsek, N., Chatterji, S., Officer, A., Coenen, M., Chhan, L. and Cieza, A. (2015) Measuring disability: comparing the impact of two data collection approaches on disability rates. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12 (6), 10329-10351. (doi:10.3390/ijerph120910329). (PMID:26308039)

Record type: Article

Abstract

The usual approach in disability surveys is to screen persons with disability upfront and then ask questions about everyday problems. The objectives of this paper are to demonstrate the impact of screeners on disability rates, to challenge the usual exclusion of persons with mild and moderate disability from disability surveys and to demonstrate the advantage of using an a posteriori cut-off. Using data of a pilot study of the WHO Model Disability Survey (MDS) in Cambodia and the polytomous Rasch model, metric scales of disability were built. The conventional screener approach based on the short disability module of the Washington City Group and the a posteriori cut-off method described in the World Disability Report were compared regarding disability rates. The screener led to imprecise rates and classified persons with mild to moderate disability as non-disabled, although these respondents already experienced important problems in daily life. The a posteriori cut-off applied to the general population sample led to a more precise disability rate and allowed for a differentiation of the performance and needs of persons with mild, moderate and severe disability. This approach can be therefore considered as an inclusive approach suitable to monitor the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Text
Sabariego_2015_Comparing the impact of two data collection approaches on Dis. Rates.pdf - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (795kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 18 August 2015
e-pub ahead of print date: 25 August 2015
Published date: 25 August 2015
Keywords: disability evaluation, international classification of functioning, disability and health, data collection, health surveys, disability surveys, screeners
Organisations: Psychology

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 381376
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/381376
ISSN: 1660-4601
PURE UUID: 11edd640-57fe-4e85-8559-07adf4f3261c

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 02 Oct 2015 12:04
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 21:14

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: C. Sabariego
Author: C. Oberhauser
Author: A. Posarac
Author: J. Bickenbach
Author: N. Kostanjsek
Author: S. Chatterji
Author: A. Officer
Author: M. Coenen
Author: L. Chhan
Author: A. Cieza

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×