ArticleCureus2026
Disability Prevalence and the Awareness-Utilization Gap for Disability Services in an Urban Community of Delhi, India: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDisability-related welfare schemes form a critical component of India's social protection architecture, yet community-level evidence on the gap between awareness and utilization in urban settings remains limited. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of disability and its socio-demographic correlates and to assess awareness and utilization of disability-related services among adults in an urban community of Delhi, generating baseline data on the awareness-utilization gap for this setting.
methodA community-based cross-sectional study was conducted in Palam, an urban resettlement colony in Delhi, from April 2020 to March 2021. Adults aged ≥25 years residing in the area for at least six months were included, and 1,246 individuals were selected by systematic random sampling. Disability - encompassing locomotor, visual, hearing, and speech impairments - was assessed using the Washington Group Short Set of Questions on Disability alongside self-report. Awareness and utilization of services across healthcare, transport, rehabilitation, and social welfare domains were captured through face-to-face interviews using a pretested semi-structured schedule. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square or Fisher's exact tests.
resultsDisability was identified in 87 of 1,246 participants (6.9%; 95% CI: 5.6%-8.4%). Prevalence was significantly higher among males (59/655; 9.0%) than females (28/591; 4.7%; p = 0.003) and varied significantly by socio-economic status (p = 0.001). Locomotor disability was most common (47/87; 54.0%), followed by hearing (18/87; 20.7%), speech (18/87; 20.7%), and visual disabilities (17/87; 19.5%); some participants reported multiple impairment types, and percentages accordingly sum to more than 100%. Awareness was universal for disability certification, pensions, and transport fare concessions (100% each), with somewhat lower awareness of seat reservation (78/87; 89.7%) but very low for the Unique Disability ID (UDID) card (6.9%), health insurance (6.9%), and loan benefits (6.9%). Utilization was highest for seat reservation (73.6%), disability certification (67.8%), and pensions (55.2%), while no participant reported utilizing health insurance or loan benefits. As data collection coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020-March 2021), reported utilization rates likely reflect pandemic-related service disruptions and should not be taken as indicative of baseline access.
conclusionDisability prevalence substantially exceeded national census estimates. Although awareness of several entitlements was high, utilization was consistently lower, with the widest gaps for health insurance, loan benefits, and vocational training. Procedural complexity and implementation failures, rather than information deficits, appear to be the primary barriers to service access. Pandemic-era disruptions likely contributed to the magnitude of the observed gaps. Bridging this divide requires simplified access pathways, targeted IEC (Information, Education, and Communication) campaigns for newer schemes such as the UDID card, and integration of disability services into routine primary healthcare.
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.