Mapping gaps and exploring impairment and disability prevalence in South Asian (SAARC) countries : a scoping review

Tools

Akram, Raisul and Buis, Arjan and Sultana, Marufa and Lauer, Jeremy A. and Morton, Alec (2024) Mapping gaps and exploring impairment and disability prevalence in South Asian (SAARC) countries : a scoping review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology. pp. 1-14. ISSN 1748-3115 (https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2024.2426618)

[thumbnail of Akram-etal-DRAT-2024-Mapping-gaps-and-exploring-impairment-and-disability-prevalence]
Preview
 Text. Filename: Akram-etal-DRAT-2024-Mapping-gaps-and-exploring-impairment-and-disability-prevalence.pdf
Final Published Version
License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 logo
Download (1MB)| Preview

Abstract

Purpose: Despite the considerable health and economic burden of disability in the South Asian (SA) region, there is limited evidence of impairments and disabilities prevalence and the need for Assistive Technologies (ATs). This scoping review aims to synthesise the evidence of the impairments and disabilities in SA countries. Materials and methods: This review followed Arksey and O'Malley’s methodological framework. EBSCOhost, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were searched for original research articles from SA countries. In this study, impairment and disability refer to functional limitations restricting individuals from performing activities, including visual, hearing, speaking, cognitive, mobility, and self-care difficulties. The review included full-text, English-language articles addressing any impairment and disability, without restrictions on publication date. Results: This review identified 105 articles distributed over the six impairment and disability domains: visual, hearing, mobility, self-care, speaking, and cognitive. Most evidence originated from India (50.5%) and focused on visual impairments (53.3%). The review identified that heterogeneity in methodologies, case identification definitions, and study settings contributed to variations in prevalence estimation and restricted the comparability within and across countries. Besides, the uneven distribution of studies across countries suggests varying inclinations of countries toward specific impairment and disability domains. Conclusions: The review identified variations in prevalence due to differences in methodologies, definitions, and contexts. The review also identified the uneven distribution of studies, limited evidence on ATs, reliance on self-reported data, and lack of nationally representative research. Future research should use standardised case identification and evidence-based approaches to enhance comparability and minimise response biases.

ORCID iDs

Akram, Raisul ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9548-7672, Buis, Arjan ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3947-293X, Sultana, Marufa, Lauer, Jeremy A. ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0652-0691 and Morton, Alec ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3803-8517;
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)