Resources search

Support persons’ views on remote communication and social media for people with communicative and cognitive disabilities

BUCHHOLZ, Margret
FERM, Ulrika
HOLMGREN, Kristina
November 2018

Expand view

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore support persons’ views on remote communication for persons with communicative and cognitive disabilities, and on factors enabling self-determination and participation.

 

Materials and methods: Five focus groups with 21 support persons were conducted. They were recorded and transcribed and data were analyzed qualitatively using focus group analysis methodology.

 

Results: The participants experience how remote communication can enable users to have increased control in their lives and how remote communication can enable self-determination and participation. Access to remote communication has a dual effect on safety. There are experiences about communicative rights of the users not being met and there is a need for better access to technology, information, and experts. There is also a need for more competence and coordination among staff and support to the users. Challenges emerge in the support persons’ dedication to the users’ right to communicate.

 

Conclusion: People with communicative and cognitive disabilities need access to remote communication in order to have control over their own lives and to achieve self-determination and participation in society. Support persons carry a large responsibility and can provide valuable insights of users’ communication situation.

Measuring disability using the Washington Group questions

August 2018

Expand view

The Washington Group was set up by the United Nations Statistical Commission. It works with countries to produce better information about people with disabilities. The Washington Group has developed useful questions for countries to use to help find out whether a person has a disability, and to help collect data and information on what the differences are between people with disabilities and people without disabilities.

Improving social inclusion and empowerment for people with disabilities in low- and middle-income countries: why does it matter and what works?

WHITE, Howard
SARAN, Ashrita
POLLOCK, Sarah
KUPER, Hannah
July 2018

Expand view

The aim of the Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) is to provide an assessment of the effectiveness of interventions to improve social inclusion and empowerment for people with disabilities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The studies included in this REA are taken from the Disability EGM prepared by the Campbell Collaboration for DFID under the auspices of the Centre for Excellence for Development Impact and Learning (CEDIL). Eligible studies included systematic reviews and impact evaluations published in English from 2000 onwards that assessed the effectiveness of interventions for people with disabilities in LMICs. The REA focused on studies identified by the EGM process that included ‘social inclusion’ or ‘empowerment’ as study outcomes and used the World Health Organization CBR matrix as a framework to categorise the different interventions and outcomes considered by the studies available. Evidence limitations and gaps were identified. 

There were 16 eligible primary studies, including studies conducted in 12 countries: Bangladesh (two studies), Brazil, Chile, China (two studies), Ethiopia, India (three studies), Kenya (two studies), Malaysia, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, and Vietnam (two studies). Five of the studies concern interventions for people with physical or sensory impairments, nine for people with mental health or neurological conditions, and two for all disability types.

Improving educational outcomes for people with disabilities in low and middle-income countries: why does it matter and what works?

KUPER, Hannah
SARAN, Ashrita
WHITE, Howard
July 2018

Expand view

The studies included in this Rapid Evidence Assessment (REA) are taken from the Disability Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) prepared by the Campbell Collaboration for the UK Department for International Development (DFID) under the auspices of the Centre for Excellence for Development Impact and Learning (CEDIL). Eligible studies included systematic reviews and impact evaluations published in English from 2000 onwards that assessed the effectiveness of interventions for people with disabilities in LMICs. Qualitative studies, process evaluations, and non-impact evaluations (e.g. crosssectional surveys) were not eligible for inclusion. Quality grading was applied to the literature, so that assessment could be made of where there was strong evidence and where evidence was limited or missing. The studies were grouped by education sub-outcomes related to different stages in education across the life course; that is: early intervention, primary education, secondary education, non-formal education, and lifelong learning. 

 

There were 24 eligible individual studies, including studies conducted in the Middle East (10), Asia (7), and Africa (5), one from Latin America, as well as one multicountry study

Disability Data Review: A collation and analysis of disability data from 40 countries

LEONARD CHESHIRE
2018

Expand view

This report was developed to inform dialogue at the 2018 Global Disability Summit. It contains full details on the methods and findings of data analysis from 40 countries and 16 indicators. The report identifies available data and existing gaps to understand how the growing body of available disability data can be disaggregated and to support monitoring and evaluation efforts for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

E-bulletin