ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Measuring Disability among Migrants with Washington Group Tools: Reflections for Field Use.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Frequent chronic pain in relation to sleep disturbances: A nationally representative study of adults in the United States.Sleep medicine · 2026Article
- Highlighting the need for more holistic, participatory design of assistive technologies in displacement settings.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Preventive Healthcare and Disability: Challenges and Opportunities.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Psychiatric Symptoms, Treatment Uptake, and Barriers to Mental Health Care Among US Adults With Post-COVID-19 Condition.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Feasibility study of a menstrual health behaviour change intervention for women and girls with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers for Vanuatu's humanitarian responses.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Disability and Migration Routes: An Explorative Analysis Among Refugees Hosted in Italy.International journal of public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measuring disability among migrants is a significant challenge; however, there is no consensus on how to measure disability and functional limitations. The present study reports a methodological approach to measure disability in refugees and asylum seekers using Washington Group (WG) tools, namely the WG Short Set (WG-SS), the Short Set Enhanced (WG-SS-E), and the Extended Set on Functioning (WG-ES). We interviewed 161 migrants in different regions of Italy. The recommended threshold for each WG tool was used. We identified 13.7% of migrants with disabilities using the WG-SS, 21.7% using the WG-SS-E, and 31.6% using the WG-ES. Anxiety and depression were the main weights to identify migrants with disabilities (11.8%). The WG-SS does not measure mental health, and therefore we do not suggest its use in the field. However, the WG-SS-E, together with some questions on pain and fatigue, should be considered to identify migrants with a greater risk of disability.
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.