Background: The World Health Organization has released the first global public health guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behavior for people living with disability. This paper presents the guidelines, related processes, and evidence, and elaborates upon how the guidelines can support inclusive policy, practice, and research. Methods: Methods were consistent with the World Health Organization protocols for developing guidelines. Systematic reviews of the evidence on physical activity for health for people living with disability were appraised, along with a consideration of the evidence used to inform the general 2020 World Health Organization guidelines. Results: Evidence supported the development of recommendations for people living with disability, stressing that there are no major risks to engaging in physical activity appropriate to an individual’s current activity level, health status, and physical function, and that the health benefits accrued generally outweigh the risks. They also emphasize the benefits of limiting sedentary behavior. Conclusions: The guidelines mark a positive step forward for disability inclusion, but considerable effort is needed to advance the agenda. This paper highlights key considerations for the implementation of the new recommendations for people living with disability, in line with the human rights agenda underpinning the Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018–2030 and allied policies.
Background
Data on functioning and disability collected at population level is essential to complement mortality and morbidity, to estimate rehabilitation needs of countries and regions and to monitor the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The objective of this paper is to briefly report the development process of the WHO Model Disability Survey, its data analysis strategy as well as its reliability and ability to measure low to high levels of functioning and disability across countries.
Methods
The development process is described in detail, and a secondary analysis using Rasch methods is conducted to report reliability and targeting using data from eight national and two regional implementations of the survey.
Results
The currently available versions of the Model Disability Survey are presented. The survey has good to very good internal reliability and good targeting in all included countries.
Conclusion
The participatory and evidence-based development, consideration of the expertise of stakeholders, the availability of previously developed ICF-based surveys, and WHO tools targeting functioning and disability are reflected in its good to very good psychometric properties. The survey has been implemented to date in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Chile, Costa Rica, India, Laos, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Tajikistan, and is used to inform policy-making, to monitor the CRPD and SDGs and to plan the delivery of rehabilitation services.
Background
The Model Disability Survey (MDS) is the current standard recommended by WHO to collect functioning and disability data. Answering calls from countries requesting a version to be implemented as a module that could be integrated into existing surveys and be used for monitoring disability trends and for data disaggregation, WHO developed the brief MDS. The objectives of this paper are to evaluate the metric properties of the disability metrics generated with the Brief MDS and the precision of the Brief MDS in comparison with the full MDS.
Results
The partial credit model, a unidimensional model for polytomous data from the Rasch family, was applied to evaluate psychometric properties using data from national MDS implementations in Chile (N = 12,265) and in Sri Lanka (N = 3000). The Brief MDS generates valid metrics for measuring disability, from the perspectives of capacity and performance, thereby achieving good levels of measurement precision in comparison with its full counterpart.
Conclusion
Given the scarcity of valid functioning and disability modules for household surveys, the Brief MDS represents a milestone in disability measurement. The Brief MDS is currently used by countries to monitor disability trends over time, which is especially important to evaluate the impact of health policies and public health interventions, to disaggregate indicators of the Sustainable Development Goals, and to monitor the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
Background
Comprehensive data is key for evidence-informed policy aiming to improve the lives of persons experiencing different levels of disability. The objective of this paper was to identify the environmental barriers — including physical, social, attitudinal, and political barriers — that might become priorities for cross-cutting policies and policies tailored to the needs of persons experiencing severe disability in Cameroon.
Methods
A secondary analysis of data obtained with the WHO Model Disability Survey was completed in the Bankim Health District (N = 559) using random forest regression to determine and compare the impact of the environmental factors on the experience of disability.
Results
The physical environment had by far the highest influence on disability, with transportation, toilet of the dwelling, and the dwelling itself being the most important factors. Factors inside one’s own home (toilet of the dwelling, and the dwelling itself) were the most important for persons with moderate and severe disability, followed by attitudes of others and issues with accessing health care.
Conclusion
Our study provides country policy makers with evidence for setting priorities and for the development of evidence-informed policies for the Bankim Health District in Cameroon.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.