ArticleAfrican journal of disability2024
Qualitative process evaluation of a disability-inclusive ultra-poor graduation programme in Uganda.
Article in African journal of disability, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is a paucity of evidence regarding what works to help persons with disabilities escape the trap of poverty. To address extreme poverty among the general population, poverty graduation approaches have gained popularity. These programmes combine direct livelihood assistance (e.g. provision of assets) with wider support given to individuals (e.g. skill development). However, these interventions have rarely been adapted to be disability-inclusive. Objectives: The present research is a qualitative process evaluation of a disability-inclusive poverty graduation intervention, implemented in Uganda from 2020 to 2022. The study focusses on contextual influences on the intervention and mechanisms of impact according to the perspectives of implementers and intervention recipients, with a complementary analysis of structures and resources used to deliver the intervention derived from a desk-based review of programme reports. Method: In all, 15 implementers and 23 persons with disabilities who received the intervention were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Interview data underwent framework analysis. Results: National infection prevention measures and loss of intervention funding associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were identified as contextual influences on the intervention. Respondents highlighted increases in social empowerment and positive changes in societal attitudes to disability as routes through which the intervention had a positive impact. However, instances of jealousy from community members not receiving the intervention were also an unintended consequence. Conclusion: Results are discussed in terms of practical implications for delivering similar interventions in other contexts. Contribution: This study contributes new knowledge about the key factors that influenced the effectiveness of a disability-inclusive poverty graduation intervention.
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.