• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Comparing Measures Of Functional Difficulty With Self-Identified Disability: Implications For Health Policy.比较功能障碍测量与自我认定残疾:对健康政策的启示。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2022 Oct;41(10):1433-1441. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2022.00395.
2
Comparing effects of question set order and location within a survey instrument of two commonly used disability question sets among a U.S. population of adults.比较在美国成年人群体中,两种常用残疾问题集在调查问卷工具中的问题集顺序和位置的影响。
Disabil Health J. 2023 Apr;16(2):101424. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2022.101424. Epub 2022 Dec 8.
3
Comparative performance of disability measures.残疾评定指标的比较性能
PLoS One. 2025 Jan 31;20(1):e0318745. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318745. eCollection 2025.
4
Comparing estimates of disability prevalence using federal and international disability measures in national surveillance.在国家监测中使用联邦和国际残疾措施比较残疾流行率的估计值。
Disabil Health J. 2019 Apr;12(2):195-202. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2018.08.008. Epub 2018 Sep 13.
5
The development and testing of a module on child functioning for identifying children with disabilities on surveys. III: Field testing.模块的开发和测试,用于在调查中识别残疾儿童的儿童功能。三:现场测试。
Disabil Health J. 2018 Oct;11(4):510-518. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2018.06.004. Epub 2018 Jul 18.
6
Data resource profile: the disability statistics questionnaire review database (DS-QR Database): a database of population censuses and household surveys with internationally comparable disability questions.数据资源简介:残疾统计调查问卷审查数据库(DS-QR数据库):一个包含具有国际可比性残疾问题的人口普查和家庭调查的数据库。
Int J Popul Data Sci. 2024 Dec 12;8(6):2477. doi: 10.23889/ijpds.v8i6.2477. eCollection 2023.
7
Estimates of prevalence, demographic characteristics and social factors among people with disabilities in the USA: a cross-survey comparison.美国残疾人的患病率、人口特征及社会因素估计:一项跨调查比较
BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 14;8(2):e017828. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017828.
8
An evaluation of the American Community Survey indicators of disability.残疾美国社区调查指标评估。
Disabil Health J. 2017 Oct;10(4):485-491. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2017.03.002. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
9
Disability in two health care systems: access, quality, satisfaction, and physician contacts among working-age Canadians and Americans with disabilities.两种医疗保健系统中的残疾状况:有残疾的加拿大和美国工作年龄人群在获得医疗服务、医疗质量、满意度和医生接触方面的情况。
Disabil Health J. 2008 Oct;1(4):196-208. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2008.07.006.
10
Measuring disability among U.S. adolescents and young adults: A survey measurement experiment.衡量美国青少年和青年的残疾情况:一项调查测量实验。
Prev Med Rep. 2024 May 23;43:102770. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102770. eCollection 2024 Jul.

引用本文的文献

1
The disability mismatch: the case for a comprehensive disability status measure.残疾不匹配:采用全面残疾状况衡量标准的理由。
Health Aff Sch. 2025 Jul 4;3(7):qxaf137. doi: 10.1093/haschl/qxaf137. eCollection 2025 Jul.
2
Undercounts of people with serious mental illness using the Washington Group Short Set questions.使用华盛顿小组简表问题对严重精神疾病患者的漏报情况。
Front Psychiatry. 2025 Jun 25;16:1606154. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1606154. eCollection 2025.
3
Experiences of Discrimination Among Women and Gender Diverse Veterans Using Veterans Health Administration Health Care.使用退伍军人健康管理局医疗保健服务的女性及性别多元化退伍军人的歧视经历。
Health Equity. 2024 Sep 30;8(1):692-700. doi: 10.1089/heq.2024.0085. eCollection 2024.
4
Foot reflexology in autoimmune diseases: Effectiveness and mechanisms.足部反射疗法在自身免疫性疾病中的应用:疗效与机制
World J Clin Cases. 2025 Mar 6;13(7):97403. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v13.i7.97403.
5
Associations between disability status and stressors experienced due to the COVID-19 pandemic among women with a recent live birth, 2020.2020年近期有活产经历的女性中,残疾状况与因新冠疫情所经历的压力源之间的关联。
Disabil Health J. 2025 Jul;18(3):101779. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2025.101779. Epub 2025 Feb 7.
6
Limitations of the Washington Group Short Set in capturing moderate and severe mobility disabilities.华盛顿小组简表在捕捉中度和重度行动障碍方面的局限性。
Health Aff Sch. 2025 Feb 13;3(2):qxaf015. doi: 10.1093/haschl/qxaf015. eCollection 2025 Feb.
7
Comparative performance of disability measures.残疾评定指标的比较性能
PLoS One. 2025 Jan 31;20(1):e0318745. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318745. eCollection 2025.
8
Prevalence of Adverse Childhood Experience Exposure by Disability Status.按残疾状况划分的童年不良经历暴露率。
JAMA Health Forum. 2025 Jan 3;6(1):e244881. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.4881.
9
The First Use of the Washington Group Short Set in a National Survey of Japan: Characteristics of the New Disability Measure in Comparison to an Existing Disability Measure.华盛顿小组简表在日本全国性调查中的首次使用:与现有残疾衡量指标相比,新残疾衡量指标的特征
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024 Dec 10;21(12):1643. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21121643.
10
Repeal of Subminimum Wages and Social Determinants of Health Among People With Disabilities.废除残疾人的最低工资和健康的社会决定因素。
JAMA Health Forum. 2024 Nov 1;5(11):e244034. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.4034.

本文引用的文献

1
Gender Identity, Disability, and Unmet Healthcare Needs among Disabled People Living in the Community in the United States.美国社区中残疾人群的性别认同、残疾状况和未满足的医疗保健需求。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 23;19(5):2588. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19052588.
2
Risks of mental health outcomes in people with covid-19: cohort study.新冠病毒感染者心理健康结局风险:队列研究。
BMJ. 2022 Feb 16;376:e068993. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-068993.
3
US Physicians' Knowledge About The Americans With Disabilities Act And Accommodation Of Patients With Disability.美国医生对《美国残疾人法案》的了解及对残疾患者的照顾。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2022 Jan;41(1):96-104. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2021.01136.
4
Measuring Disability: An Examination of Differences Between the Washington Group Short Set on Functioning and the American Community Survey Disability Questions.衡量残疾情况:对华盛顿小组功能简短数据集与美国社区调查残疾问题之间差异的考察。
Natl Health Stat Report. 2021 Aug(161):1-9.
5
Defining long COVID: Going back to the start.定义长新冠:追溯起源。
Med. 2021 May 14;2(5):501-504. doi: 10.1016/j.medj.2021.03.003. Epub 2021 Mar 25.
6
Evaluating MTurk as a recruitment tool for rural people with disabilities.评估 MTurk 作为一种招募农村残疾人的工具。
Disabil Health J. 2021 Jan;14(1):100991. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2020.100991. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
7
Health status changes with transitory disability over time.健康状况随时间推移的短暂性残疾而变化。
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Jan;244:112647. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112647. Epub 2019 Oct 31.
8
Differences in social connectedness and perceived isolation among rural and urban adults with disabilities.农村和城市残疾成年人在社会联系和感知孤立方面的差异。
Disabil Health J. 2020 Jan;13(1):100829. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2019.100829. Epub 2019 Aug 1.
9
The Lancet Psychiatry Commission: a blueprint for protecting physical health in people with mental illness.《柳叶刀》精神病学委员会:保护精神疾病患者身体健康的蓝图。
Lancet Psychiatry. 2019 Aug;6(8):675-712. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(19)30132-4. Epub 2019 Jul 16.
10
Measuring The Lifetime Costs Of Serious Mental Illness And The Mitigating Effects Of Educational Attainment.衡量严重精神疾病的终身成本和受教育程度的缓解作用。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2019 Apr;38(4):652-659. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05246.

比较功能障碍测量与自我认定残疾:对健康政策的启示。

Comparing Measures Of Functional Difficulty With Self-Identified Disability: Implications For Health Policy.

机构信息

Jean P. Hall (

Noelle K. Kurth, University of Kansas.

出版信息

Health Aff (Millwood). 2022 Oct;41(10):1433-1441. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2022.00395.

DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.2022.00395
PMID:36190890
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10353341/
Abstract

The Affordable Care Act mandated data collection standards to identify people with disabilities in federal surveys to better understand and address health disparities within this population. Most federal surveys use six questions from the American Community Survey (ACS-6) to identify people with disabilities, whereas many international surveys use the six-item Washington Group Short Set (WG-SS). The National Survey on Health and Disability (NSHD), which focuses on working-age adults ages 18-64, uses both question sets and contains other disability questions. We compared ACS-6 and WG-SS responses with self-reported disability types. The ACS-6 and WG-SS failed to identify 20 percent and 43 percent, respectively, of respondents who reported disabilities in response to other NSHD questions (a broader WG-SS version missed 4.4 percent of respondents). The ACS-6 and the WG-SS performed especially poorly in capturing respondents with psychiatric disabilities or chronic health conditions. Researchers and policy makers must augment or strengthen federal disability questions to improve the accuracy of disability prevalence counts, understanding of health disparities, and planning of appropriate services for a diverse and growing population.

摘要

平价医疗法案要求数据收集标准,以在联邦调查中确定残疾人士,从而更好地了解和解决这一人群中的健康差异问题。大多数联邦调查使用美国社区调查中的六个问题(ACS-6)来识别残疾人士,而许多国际调查则使用六项目华盛顿小组短集(WG-SS)。专注于 18-64 岁工作年龄成年人的国家健康和残疾调查(NSHD)同时使用这两套问题集,并包含其他残疾问题。我们将 ACS-6 和 WG-SS 的回答与自我报告的残疾类型进行了比较。ACS-6 和 WG-SS 分别未能识别出 20%和 43%的在其他 NSHD 问题中报告有残疾的受访者(一个更广泛的 WG-SS 版本则遗漏了 4.4%的受访者)。ACS-6 和 WG-SS 在捕捉有精神残疾或慢性健康状况的受访者方面表现尤其不佳。研究人员和政策制定者必须补充或加强联邦残疾问题,以提高残疾流行率计数的准确性、对健康差异的理解以及为多样化和不断增长的人口规划适当的服务。