Logo UNICEF Innocenti
Office of Research-Innocenti
menu icon

Profiles

email

Anil Thota

Consultant

Anil Thota is a Team Lead/Evidence Synthesis Specialist at the UNICEF Office of Research-Innocenti leading the production of an Evidence Gap Map (EGM) on interventions for children with disabilities. Prior to this, he worked with the Campbell Collaboration where he completed a large EGM on what works to improve sexual and reproductive health and rights outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa and contributed evidence syntheses to a guidebook for practitioners on child protection interventions. He has also recently published a systematic review on early warning systems for childhood cancer in LMICs working with colleagues at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Canada. Anil spent nearly a decade at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) till 2019 where he was acting branch chief and scientific team lead for the Community Guide Branch. He has also worked at Health Quality Ontario (2016-2017) as Manager of Clinical Reviews within the Evidence Development and Standards unit. Anil has a medical degree (MBBS) from the Manipal Academy of Higher Education (India) and a Master of Public Health (MPH) degree from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (USA). He is currently enrolled part-time at the University of Oxford in the MSc programme on evidence-based healthcare.

Publications

Inclusion Matters: Inclusive Interventions for Children with Disabilities – An evidence and gap map from low- and middle-income countries
Publication

Inclusion Matters: Inclusive Interventions for Children with Disabilities – An evidence and gap map from low- and middle-income countries

In this publication we report our Evidence and Gap Mapping (EGM) of “Inclusive Interventions for Children with Disabilities in LMICs”. It shows that research is lacking in many critical areas: awareness and non-discrimination, protection, adequate standard of living, family and community life, and empowerment – that represent critical areas of policy and programming in need of robust evidence to improve inclusion and participation. Specific areas overlooked include tackling harmful stereotypes, tackling abuse and violence and ways to reduce stigma; on improving accessibility to water, sanitation, hygiene, housing and food; and interventions that aim for children with disabilities to enjoy their right to be heard, to play and to have their views considered in all matters affecting them. Health research covers 3 in 4 of all studies in our EGM, but there is little evidence on improving access to general health services and accessibility for children with disabilities in healthcare settings. Inclusive education was moderately represented, but lacked the detail to understand how it was implemented or if inclusive education was effective in improving (or harming) academic outcomes, school readiness, graduation rates or the quality of educational services. The companion protocol for the EGM can be found at this link Please also see our EGM on Child and Adolescent Mental Health and Psychosocial Support Interventions
Effectiveness of Inclusive Interventions for Children with Disabilities in Low- and Middle-income Countries: Protocol for an evidence and gap map
Publication

Effectiveness of Inclusive Interventions for Children with Disabilities in Low- and Middle-income Countries: Protocol for an evidence and gap map

Of the nearly 1 billion people with a disability, 80% live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and 240 million are children. Children with disabilities remain one of the most marginalized and excluded groups in society. This protocol to the Evidence and Gap Map on the Effectiveness of Inclusive Interventions for Children with Disabilities Living in LMICs aims to identify the available evidence on inclusive interventions to improve access to health, education and social services for these children, and enable them to participate fully in society by addressing discrimination, improving living conditions, incorporating mainstreaming approaches and promoting empowerment. It highlights gaps in the evidence to prioritize future research and evaluation agendas; identifies contextual factors related to various populations and settings; and provides a database of peer-reviewed and grey literature in this area.