Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37132016›Full record

ReviewCampbell systematic reviews2023

Effectiveness of interventions for improving social inclusion outcomes for people with disabilities in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

Ashrita Saran, Xanthe Hunt, Howard White, Hannah Kuper

Full text readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Campbell systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Transforming public mental health: a review on global trends, challenges, and pathways to change.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The "Why" in Mental Health, Stigma, and Addictive Behaviors: Causal Inferences in Applied Settings.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
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

4 authors.

Ashrita SaranCampbell South Asia Delhi India.
Xanthe HuntInstitute for Life Course Health Research, Department of Global Health Stellenbosch University Cape Town South Africa.
Howard WhiteCampbell South Asia Delhi India.
Hannah KuperInternational Centre for Evidence on Disability London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine London UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: People with disabilities-more than a billion people worldwide-are frequently excluded from social and political life, and often experience stigmatising attitudes and behaviours from people without disabilities. This stigma, coupled with inaccessible environments and systems and institutional barriers (e.g., lack of inclusive legislation), may result in discrimination against people with disabilities (and their families) to the degree that they are not able to enjoy their rights on an equal basis with others. Objectives: This review examines the effectiveness of interventions for improving social inclusion outcomes (acquisition of skills for social inclusion, broad-based social inclusion, and improved relationships) for people with disabilities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Search Methods: We searched academic and online databases, carried out citation tracking of included studies, and contacted experts to ensure our search was as comprehensive as possible. We also ran the searches with search terms specific to social inclusion review using Open Alex in EPPI reviewer. Selection Criteria: We included all studies which reported on impact evaluations of interventions to improve social inclusion outcomes for people with disabilities in LMIC. Data Collection and Analysis: We used review management software EPPI Reviewer to screen the search results. Two review authors independently extracted the data from each study report, including for the confidence in study findings appraisal. Data and information were extracted regarding available characteristics of participants, intervention characteristics and control conditions, research design, sample size, risk of bias and outcomes, and results. Random-effects inverse variance weighted meta-analytic methods were used to synthesise standardised mean differences for the outcomes. Main Results: We identified 37 experimental and quasi-experimental studies. Studies were conducted in 16 countries, with the majority of the included studies ( Authors’ Conclusions: The review's findings suggest that various interventions to improve the social inclusion of people with disabilities have a significant positive effect. Interventions such as social and communication training and personal assistance led to significant improvement in the social behaviour and social skills of people with disabilities. Studies targeting broad-based social inclusion showed a large and significant positive effect. A moderate effect was reported from interventions designed to improve relationships between people with disabilities and their families and communities. However, the findings of this review must be interpreted cautiously, given the low confidence in study methods, severe heterogeneity and significant publication bias. The available evidence focused primarily on individual-level barriers such as interventions for improving social or communications skills of people with disabilities and not the systemic drivers of exclusions such as addressing societal barriers to inclusion, such as stigma reduction, and interventions to strengthen legislation, infrastructure, and institutions.

Identifiers

PMID37132016
PMCPMC10029810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read54
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.