Lauer Eric Andrew, Houtenville Andrew J
Institute on Disability, College of Health and Human Services, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, USA.
Institute on Disability, Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, USA.
BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 14;8(2):e017828. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017828.
A national priority for disability research in the USA is the standardised identification of people with disabilities in surveillance efforts. Mandated by federal statute, six dichotomous difficulty-focused questions were implemented in national surveys to identify people with disabilities. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence, demographic characteristics and social factors among people with disabilities based on these six questions using multiple national surveys in the USA.
American Community Survey (ACS), Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement (CPS-ASEC), National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP).
Civilian, non-institutionalised US residents aged 18 and over from the 2009 to 2014 ACS, 2009 to 2014 CPS-ASEC, 2009 to 2014 NHIS and 2008 SIPP waves 3, 7 and 10.
Disability was assessed using six standardised questions asking people about hearing, vision, cognition, ambulatory, self-care and independent living disabilities. Social factors were assessed with questions asking people to report their education, employment status, family size, health and marital status, health insurance and income.
Risk ratios and demographic distributions for people with disabilities were consistent across survey. People with disabilities were at decreased risk of having college education, employment, families with three or more people, excellent or very good self-reported health and a spouse. People with disabilities were also consistently at greater risk of having health insurance and living below the poverty line. Estimates of disability prevalence varied between surveys from 2009 to 2014 (range 11.76%-17.08%).
Replicating the existing literature, we found the estimation of disparities and inequity people with disabilities experience to be consistent across survey. Although there was a range of prevalence estimates, demographic factors for people with disabilities were consistent across surveys. Variations in prevalence estimates can be explained by survey context effects.
美国残疾研究的一项国家优先事项是在监测工作中对残疾人进行标准化识别。根据联邦法规的要求,在全国性调查中实施了六个以困难为重点的二分法问题,以识别残疾人。本研究的目的是利用美国多项全国性调查,根据这六个问题评估残疾人的患病率、人口特征和社会因素。
美国社区调查(ACS)、当前人口调查年度社会和经济补充调查(CPS-ASEC)、国家健康访谈调查(NHIS)以及收入与项目参与调查(SIPP)。
2009年至2014年美国社区调查、2009年至2014年当前人口调查年度社会和经济补充调查、2009年至2014年国家健康访谈调查以及2008年收入与项目参与调查第3、7和10轮中18岁及以上的美国平民、非机构化居民。
使用六个标准化问题评估残疾情况,这些问题询问人们的听力、视力、认知、行动、自我护理和独立生活方面的残疾情况。通过询问人们报告其教育程度、就业状况、家庭规模、健康和婚姻状况、健康保险和收入的问题来评估社会因素。
不同调查中残疾人的风险比率和人口分布情况一致。残疾人接受大学教育、就业、拥有三个或更多成员家庭、自我报告健康状况良好或非常好以及有配偶的风险较低。残疾人拥有健康保险和生活在贫困线以下的风险也一直较高。2009年至2014年不同调查中残疾患病率的估计值有所不同(范围为11.76%-17.08%)。
与现有文献一致,我们发现不同调查中对残疾人所经历的差异和不平等的估计是一致的。尽管患病率估计值存在一定范围,但残疾人的人口因素在不同调查中是一致的。患病率估计值的差异可由调查背景效应来解释。