Sabariego Carla, Lee Lindsay, Bickenbach Jerome, Chatterji Somnath
Swiss Paraplegic Research, Nottwil, Switzerland.
Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Disabil Rehabil. 2025 Aug;47(16):4212-4219. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2024.2441424. Epub 2024 Dec 19.
The call for high quality disability data has gained momentum around the world. The objective of this paper is to analyse the consistency of estimates obtained with the Washington Group short set of questions, which are being recommended for use in national population surveys.
Prevalence rates and their 95% confidence intervals were estimated using data from five surveys carried out in three low-income countries and one high-income country.
Two surveys undertaken in the same year generated different disability prevalences: 16.1% and 25.6% using a broad cut-off; 4.0% and 6.7% using a narrower cut-off. In two longitudinal surveys, over 50% of persons identified as having disability in a wave were not identified as such in the next wave, independent of cut-off used. Data disaggregation by education and remunerative employment shows little differences between persons with and without disability, which is inconsistent with current evidence.
The paper shows some significant inconsistencies that can have consequences for policy, international comparisons, for the monitoring the CRPD and SDGs, and most importantly, for persons with disability. It is important that advocates, policy makers, statistical offices and country authorities follow reliability and validity standards when recommending tools for disability data collection.
在全球范围内，对高质量残疾数据的需求日益增长。本文的目的是分析使用华盛顿小组简短问题集所获得估计值的一致性，该问题集被推荐用于全国人口调查。
利用在三个低收入国家和一个高收入国家开展的五项调查数据，估计患病率及其95%置信区间。
同年进行的两项调查得出了不同的残疾患病率：采用宽泛临界值时分别为16.1%和25.6%；采用较窄临界值时分别为4.0%和6.7%。在两项纵向调查中，超过50%在某一轮中被认定为残疾的人在下一轮中未被认定为残疾，这与所采用的临界值无关。按教育程度和有酬就业情况进行数据分类显示，残疾人和非残疾人之间差异不大，这与当前证据不一致。
本文显示了一些重大的不一致之处，这些不一致可能对政策、国际比较、《残疾人权利公约》和可持续发展目标的监测产生影响，最重要的是，对残疾人产生影响。倡导者、政策制定者、统计机构和国家当局在推荐残疾数据收集工具时遵循可靠性和有效性标准非常重要。
