ReviewBMC public health2019
Personalisation schemes in social care: are they growing social and health inequalities?
Review in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Perspectives of choice and control in daily life for people following brain injury: A qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Pooled it
- A Scoping Review of Therapy Provision Under the National Disability Insurance Scheme: Provider-Identified Barriers and Facilitators.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2026Article
- Disparities in access to health and support services for people with disability in Australia: a scoping review of the structural social determinants.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Disability, Subject-Dependence, and the Bad-Difference View.Bioethics · 2025Article
- Using Individual Service Funds (ISFs) to Improve Access to Self-Directed Support for Adults With Intellectual Disabilities: A Participatory Realist Review.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2025Review
- Systematic review: the impact of policy levers on mental health service utilization and access for Autistic children.Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health · 2025Review
- The presence and absence of gender and intersectionality in the 2023 NDIS review: a content analysis.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Connecting Care Closer to Home: Evaluation of a Regional Motor Neurone Disease Multidisciplinary Clinic.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- AI technology to support adaptive functioning in neurodevelopmental conditions in everyday environments: a systematic review.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- The experiences of families of children with cerebral palsy and complex disability after three years accessing the National Disability Insurance Scheme.Australian occupational therapy journal · 2024Article
- Peer support needs, preferences and experiences of adults with acquired neurological disability: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Access to child developmental assessment services in culturally and linguistically diverse metropolitan Sydney: a retrospective cohort analysis.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Development and preliminary evaluation of a novel participant-led video intervention to train disability support workers.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Accessibility in People with Disabilities in Primary Healthcare Centers: A Dimension of the Quality of Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- How personalisation programs can exacerbate socio-economic inequities: findings from budget utilisation in the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Women's experiences of accessing individualized disability supports: gender inequality and Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme.International journal for equity in health · 2021Article
- Flexibility in individual funding schemes: How well did Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme support remote learning for students with disability during COVID-19?Social policy & administration · 2021Article
- Individual quality of life and the environment - towards a concept of livable areas for persons with disabilities in Poland.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Vagueness and Ambiguity in Communication of Case Management: A Content Analysis in the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme.International journal of integrated care · 2021Article
- Influences of service characteristics and older people's attributes on outcomes from direct payments.BMC geriatrics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe connection between choice, control and health is well established in the literature on the social determinants of health, which includes choice and control of vital health and social services. However, even in the context of universal health and social care schemes, the ability to exercise choice and control can be distributed unequally. This paper uses the case of the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) to examine these issues. The NDIS is a major policy reform based on an international trend towards personalisation in social care. It aims to increase choice and control over services and supports for people who have or acquire a permanent disability, thereby boosting citizen empowerment and improving health and social outcomes.
methodsThe research is a structured review of empirical evidence on the administration and outcomes of the NDIS to identify how social factors constrain or enable the ability of individuals to exercise choice within personalised care schemes.
resultsWe show how social determinants of health at the individual level can collide with the complexity of policy delivery systems to entrench health inequalities.
conclusionMany social policy reforms internationally focus on improving empowerment through enabling choice and control. However, if administrative systems do not take account of existing structural inequities, then such schemes are likely to entrench or grow social inequality. Our research indicates that more attention must be given to the design of policy delivery systems for personalisation schemes to ensure health equity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.