ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
Public policies for the promotion of paralympic sport in Latin America: a comparative analysis of 10 countries.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2026. 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.
- Paralympic sport in Central Asia: a scoping review with descriptive analysis of participation, achievement, and medal efficiency (1996-2024).Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This article comparatively analyzes public policies for the promotion of Paralympic sport in ten Latin American countries with outstanding results in the Paralympic medal table during the last Olympic cycle: Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Argentina, Cuba, Venezuela, Costa Rica, Chile, Peru, and Ecuador. From a social study of disability perspective, it examines how these countries have incorporated sport practiced by persons with disabilities into their regulatory frameworks, what support instruments they have developed, and to what extent they have built institutional mechanisms to foster access, retention, and athletic development. Methods: The study is based on a comparative documentary analysis of laws, regulations, programs, institutional plans, and official documents. Results: The results show that most countries have advanced formal recognition of the right to sport for persons with disabilities and in the creation of support instruments, especially scholarships and awards associated with high performance. However, these mechanisms are mainly concentrated on rewarding achievements already attained rather than correcting structural inequalities in access. The main gaps appear in talent identification, in the articulation of pathways for athletic progression, and in the incorporation of gender- and territory-based approaches. Discussion: The article concludes that the region has made greater progress in normative recognition and performance incentives than in consolidating comprehensive, accessible, and equitable systems. The main public policy challenge is to strengthen stable conditions for the training, continuity, and development of athletic trajectories.
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.