Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40469560›Full record

ArticleAfrican journal of disability2025

A conceptual framework for self-advocacy by people with intellectual disabilities.

Babalwa P Tyabashe-Phume, Sharon R Kleintjes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in African journal of disability, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

2 authors.

Babalwa P Tyabashe-PhumeDepartment of Psychiatry and Mental Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4004-6436
Sharon R KleintjesDepartment of Psychiatry and Mental Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5104-0414

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: People with intellectual disabilities are generally not consulted in the development of public policies, which impact their lives, and little is known about how to best empower people with intellectual disabilities to enable them to participate in public policy processes. Objectives: Our article reports on developing a conceptual framework to support self-advocacy by people with intellectual disabilities in social and health-related policy development in South Africa. Method: Our qualitative study was conducted using empowerment theory and integrated the concept of Ubuntu as a guide and was underpinned by a phenomenological approach. Data were collected through a scoping review, semi-structured interviews and focus groups. The scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scoping review protocol. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were analysed using framework analysis. Data sources were triangulated to develop the conceptual framework, using a process adapted from three approaches used to develop similar conceptual frameworks. Results: Data triangulation identified three core elements for self-advocacy: (1) personal development; (2) creating a supportive environment to facilitate the empowerment of people with intellectual disability; and (3) improved policy participation opportunities. Conclusion: Participation of people with intellectual disabilities in public policy decisions, which can improve their quality of life, can be supported by developing their capacity for participation and increasing policymakers' understanding as well as facilitation of what is needed to support their participation. Contribution: Our study offers a framework for a comprehensive approach to supporting people with intellectual disabilities in participating in and influencing public policy processes that impact their lives.

Indexed as

conceptual frameworkempowermentintellectual disabilitypolicy participationself-advocacyUbuntu

Identifiers

PMID40469560
PMCPMC12135102

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.