ArticleMedical humanities2024
Staff disability data in UK higher education: Evidence from EDI reports.
Article in Medical humanities, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore how higher education institutions (HEIs) make transparent the data they collect on staff disability, and how this relates to existing equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) charters.
designDescriptive cross-sector quantitative study based on UK HEIs.
settingHigher education sector in the UK.
participants162 HEIs across the UK with information extracted from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA), each institution's website and Advance HE. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Availability of a publicly available EDI report. Type of information on staff disability identified within the EDI report and level of detail, the latter derived from the number of different types of information provided in the report. Athena SWAN and Disability Confident award level for each HEI were used as a proxy for the sector's commitment to EDI.
resultsUnder a quarter of HEIs do not have an open EDI report online. The majority of Athena SWAN award holders make their EDI reports publicly available, which is similar by Disability Confident status. Russell Group universities are more likely to have a publicly available report. Regionally, EDI report availability is lowest in London. The level of detail with regards to staff disability varies, with more than half of institutions providing 'little detail' and just under a third 'some detail'. Athena SWAN award holders and Disability Confident members are twice as likely to provide 'some detail' than those which do not hold an award.
conclusionsChallenges remain to obtain a clear picture of staff with disabilities within higher education. The lack of both uniformity and transparency in EDI reporting with respect to disability hinders the ability to quantify staff with disabilities within higher education, develop meaningful interventions and address inequities more widely.
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.