Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40354340›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2025

Sources of evidence, pathways, and processes to support disability-inclusive decision-making in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review.

Ebruphiyo Ruth Useh, Zara Trafford, Prince Changole, Xanthe Hunt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Ebruphiyo Ruth UsehInstitute for Life Course Health Research, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7956-2898
Zara TraffordInstitute for Life Course Health Research, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Prince ChangoleInstitute for Life Course Health Research, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Xanthe HuntInstitute for Life Course Health Research, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Widespread failure to sufficiently account for disability in policies and programming across sectors limits the inclusion of people with disabilities in global health and development strategies. These oversights are especially marked in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where 80% of the world's 1.3 billion people with disabilities reside. To bridge disability policy and programming gaps, it is important to first understand how key categories of decision-makers think about disability in their work, including which sources of evidence, processes, and pathways they rely on to make policy and programming decisions about disability, and what influences (aside from evidence) shape their decision-making. To address these issues, we conducted a scoping review of the literature concerning the use of evidence in governmental and non-governmental decision-making around disability-inclusion in LMICs. We systematically searched databases of peer-reviewed literature and used thorough hand searches to gather grey literature. Documents were eligible if they focused on key governmental and non-governmental stakeholders; disability-inclusive or disability-related decision-making in mainstream or targeted planning, policy-making, programming, or evaluations; and were based on data from LMICs. All literature was double screened and extracted according to a standardised extraction sheet by four reviewers, working in pairs. We included 16 papers, with sources of evidence cited being highly variable and encompassing both empirical and experiential evidence, while barriers and facilitators to using evidence varied by evidence source. Outside of evidence, notable influences on decision-making included government legislation, power dynamics and involvement, stakeholder relationships, the local landscape, funding, and attitudes towards disability. This work highlights the barriers to, and enablers of, evidence utilisation in relation to disability, which can be targeted with intervention and advocacy. Moreover, this review suggests that supporting evidence-based decision-making in relation to disability in LMICs necessitates engagement with varied framings of evidence and influences on decision-making outside of evidence.

Identifiers

PMID40354340
PMCPMC12068629

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.