Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25862485›Full record

ArticleCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2015

Rethinking disability: the social model of disability and chronic disease.

Sara Goering

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

60 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Outcome of Solid Organ Transplantation in Patients With Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Literature Review.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Trial
  8. Communication barriers for d/Deaf people with cancer: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Sara GoeringDepartment of Philosophy, University of Washington, Box 353350, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA, SGoering@u.washington.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Disability is commonly viewed as a problem that exists in a person's body and requires medical treatment. The social model of disability, by contrast, distinguishes between impairment and disability, identifying the latter as a disadvantage that stems from a lack of fit between a body and its social environment. This paper describes the social model of disability and then considers how it might deal with chronic disease or impairment and why medical professionals should learn about disability perspectives to improve their practice.

Identifiers

PMID25862485
PMCPMC4596173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.