ArticleDisability and health journal2026
A comparative analysis of self-identification and functional measures of disability.
Article in Disability and health journal, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDisability is typically measured in surveys using functional limitation questions rather than asking respondents to self-identify as having a disability. Little is known about the characteristics of those who self-identify with a disability and how they compare with those identified via functional limitation questions.
objectiveTo compare the prevalence and characteristics of people with disabilities measured by both functional and self-identification measures, and to assess the overlap between these populations.
methodsUsing nationally representative survey data from 2023, we conduct bivariate comparisons of demographic, health, functional characteristics and financial needs between populations captured by self-identification question, the Washington Group Short Set on Functioning (WG-SS) and the American Community Survey Six (ACS-6) Questions. We estimate a multivariable regression to explore predictors of self-identification.
resultsAdding a self-identification question doubles the population with disabilities relative to measuring disability with the WG-SS alone, and increases the population by 30 % relative to the ACS-6 alone. People who self identify are less likely to be female or Hispanic/Latinx, are in worse physical health and more likely to be LGBTQIA + compared to those identified only by functional measures. The group identified by both the self-identification and either functioning question set are in the worst health and are more likely to participate in disability programs.
conclusionIncluding a self-identification question in addition to functioning questions expands the prevalence of disability to varying degrees depending on which functional questions are used, but use of functioning and self-identification questions together enhances identification of the subgroup with highest needs.
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.