• 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

全面统计:联邦调查中残疾包容性衡量标准的证据

Counting everyone: evidence for inclusive measures of disability in federal surveys.

作者信息

Hall Jean P, Goddard Kelsey S, Ipsen Catherine, Myers Andrew, Kurth Noelle K

机构信息

Institute for Health and Disability Policy Studies, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, United States.

Rural Institute for Inclusive Communities, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, United States.

出版信息

Health Aff Sch. 2024 Aug 21;2(9):qxae106. doi: 10.1093/haschl/qxae106. eCollection 2024 Sep.

DOI:10.1093/haschl/qxae106
PMID:39280043
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11393306/
Abstract

The US Census Bureau has used the American Community Survey six-question set (ACS-6) to identify disabled people since 2008. In late 2023, the Census Bureau proposed changes to these questions that would have reduced disability prevalence estimates by 42%. Because these estimates inform funding and programs that support the health and independence of people with disabilities, many disability researchers and advocates feared this change in data collection would lead to reductions in funding and services. While the Census has paused-but not ruled out-the proposed changes, it is critical that alternate, more inclusive disability questions be identified and tested. We used data from the 2023/2024 National Survey on Health and Disability to explore alternative questions to identify disabled people in national surveys. A single broad question about conditions identified 11.2% more people with disabilities, and missed significantly fewer people with psychiatric disabilities compared to the current ACS-6 questions. A combination of a broad question and the existing ACS-6 questions may be necessary to more accurately and inclusively identify people with disabilities.

摘要

自2008年以来,美国人口普查局一直使用美国社区调查六问题集(ACS-6)来识别残疾人。2023年末,人口普查局提议对这些问题进行修改,这将使残疾流行率估计数降低42%。由于这些估计数为支持残疾人健康和独立的资金及项目提供依据,许多残疾研究人员和倡导者担心数据收集方面的这一变化会导致资金和服务减少。虽然人口普查已暂停——但并未排除——提议的修改,但确定并测试替代性的、更具包容性的残疾问题至关重要。我们利用2023/2024年全国健康与残疾调查的数据,探索在全国调查中识别残疾人的替代问题。与当前的ACS-6问题相比,一个关于疾病状况的单一宽泛问题识别出的残疾人多11.2%,遗漏的精神残疾者明显更少。可能需要一个宽泛问题与现有的ACS-6问题相结合,才能更准确、更具包容性地识别残疾人。

相似文献

1
Counting everyone: evidence for inclusive measures of disability in federal surveys.全面统计:联邦调查中残疾包容性衡量标准的证据
Health Aff Sch. 2024 Aug 21;2(9):qxae106. doi: 10.1093/haschl/qxae106. eCollection 2024 Sep.
2
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.
3
Underrepresentation of adolescents with respiratory, mental health, and developmental disabilities using American Community Survey (ACS) questions.青少年在使用美国社区调查(ACS)问题时,在呼吸系统、心理健康和发育障碍方面代表性不足。
Disabil Health J. 2018 Jul;11(3):447-450. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2017.11.005. Epub 2017 Nov 29.
4
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.
5
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.
6
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.
7
Collecting information on disability in the 2000 Census: an example of interagency cooperation.2000年人口普查中残疾信息的收集:跨部门合作实例
Soc Secur Bull. 1999;62(4):21-30.
8
Counting disability in the National Health Interview Survey and its consequence: Comparing the American Community Survey to the Washington Group disability measures.国家健康访谈调查中的残疾人口统计及其后果:美国社区调查与华盛顿残疾组测量方法的比较。
Disabil Health J. 2024 Apr;17(2):101553. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2023.101553. Epub 2023 Nov 14.
9
Rapid assessment of disability in the Philippines: understanding prevalence, well-being, and access to the community for people with disabilities to inform the W-DARE project.菲律宾残疾情况快速评估:了解残疾人的患病率、福祉及融入社区的情况,为“W - DARE项目”提供信息。
Popul Health Metr. 2016 Aug 2;14:26. doi: 10.1186/s12963-016-0096-y. eCollection 2016.
10
"Knocking on Doors that Don't Open": experiences of caregivers of children living with disabilities in Iquitos and Lima, Peru.“敲不开的门”:秘鲁伊基托斯和利马生活障碍儿童的护理者的经历。
Disabil Rehabil. 2019 Oct;41(21):2538-2547. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2018.1471741. Epub 2018 Jun 17.

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
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.
3
Comparative performance of disability measures.残疾评定指标的比较性能

本文引用的文献

1
Impairment and Disability Identity and Perceptions of Trust, Respect, and Fairness.残障认同与感知:信任、尊重与公平。
JAMA Health Forum. 2023 Sep 1;4(9):e233180. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2023.3180.
2
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.
3
Underrepresentation of adolescents with respiratory, mental health, and developmental disabilities using American Community Survey (ACS) questions.
PLoS One. 2025 Jan 31;20(1):e0318745. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318745. eCollection 2025.
青少年在使用美国社区调查(ACS)问题时,在呼吸系统、心理健康和发育障碍方面代表性不足。
Disabil Health J. 2018 Jul;11(3):447-450. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2017.11.005. Epub 2017 Nov 29.