4.7 Article

Estimating disability prevalence and disability-related inequalities: Does the choice of measure matter?

期刊

SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE
卷 272, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113740

关键词

Disability prevalence; Disability measures; Employment; Voter turnout; Inequality; Denmark; The Washington group short set of questions on; disability; The global activity limitation indicator

资金

  1. Ministry of Social Affairs and the Interior
  2. DUF - Danish Youth Council
  3. Danish Institute for Human Rights
  4. Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen
  5. Satspuljen 2016-2019

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the impact of using different disability measures on disability prevalence, health profiles, and inequalities in social policy success indicators. The results show that different measures can result in different definitions of disability and health profiles for individuals, as well as varying estimates of inequalities in employment based on the Global Activity Limitation Indicator and the Washington Group Short Set.
Rationale: Different measures for quantifying the percentage of people with a disability in surveys result in diverging estimates of prevalence and disability-related inequalities. Thus understanding the implications of using different disability measures is of vital policy importance. This study is the first to investigate the within survey variation in disability prevalence based on two internationally recognized measures: the Washington Group Short Set (WGSS) and the Global Activity Limitation Indicator (GALI). It is also the first to examine the disability-related inequality in voter turnout, based on official validated voter records. Methods: We use data on 11,308 25-54-year-old respondents from the 2016 wave of the Survey of Health, Impairment and Living Conditions in Denmark (SHILD) to estimate the disability prevalence based on the WGSS and the GALI. Moreover, we investigate health characteristics of individuals with a disability according to the two measures and inequalities in two central social policy success parameters: voter turnout and employment. Results: The WGSS estimates higher disability prevalence (10.6%) than the GALI (5.5%). Only 2.5% of the sample are in both groups, implying that largely, different individuals are defined as having a disability depending on which measure is used. The health profiles of the two groups also differ, as people with a GALI-defined disability are significantly more likely to report a severe mental illness or a major physical health problem. The GALI estimates indicate larger inequalities between people with and without a disability than the WGSS for the probability of being employed, whereas there are no significant differences for voter turnout. Conclusion: The choice of disability measure strongly influences within-survey estimates of disability prevalence, the health profile of the defined groups, and inequalities in outcomes. The WGSS underrepresents the number of people suffering from severe mental illness. Estimated inequalities in employment are larger for the GALI than for the WGSS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据