Logo UNICEF Innocenti
Office of Research-Innocenti
menu icon

Inclusion Matters

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

Author(s)

Anil Thota; Ebele Mogo; Dominic Igbelina; Greg Sheaf; Rahma Mustafa; Shivit Bakrania; Alberto Vásquez Encalada; Gavin Wood

 

Publication series:
Innocenti Research Report

No. of pages: 57

Download the report

(PDF, 4.40 MB)

Abstract

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

Available in:
English

More in this series: Innocenti Research Report

Evidence-based intervention design for behaviour change during a health emergency
Publication

Evidence-based intervention design for behaviour change during a health emergency

As vaccine availability has increased in much of the world, challenges remain related to acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, further compounded by global inequities in vaccine access and the emergence of new variants. As such, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) continue to be an important tool in slowing and preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. This series of rapid evidence assessments (REA), using the COM-B model as a theoretical framework, sought to understand the existing evidence about who delays or refuses COVID-19 vaccination and who does not adhere to NPI measures, why and in what contexts. The objective is to inform tailored policies and interventions that support vaccination acceptance and adoption of recommended NPI measures, drawing in the COM-B Behaviour Change Wheel. Demographics did not consistently predict non-adherence to protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of psychological capability, people with less COVID-19 knowledge are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and not adhere to social distancing. In terms of social opportunities, people who perceive less social normative pressure to engage in protective behaviours are more likely to not adhere to social distancing and mask wearing recommendations. In terms of reflective motivations, people who perceive the protective behaviour to be less effective are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and avoid mask wearing; people who perceive themselves to have less control over protective behaviours are less likely to adopt social distancing and mask wearing behaviours; and people who perceive themselves to be less susceptible to catching COVID-19 are more likely to avoid or refuse vaccination and to not adhere to mask wearing recommendations. The series of REAs was used to develop an evidence-informed practical toolkit for policy makers and practitioners to inform decision making around future efforts to promote uptake and maintenance of some or all recommended NPIs to mitigate the spread of outbreaks of transmissible respiratory diseases, including potential new and emerging pandemic threats.
Predictors of mask wearing to prevent the community spread of SARS-COV-2
Publication

Predictors of mask wearing to prevent the community spread of SARS-COV-2

As vaccine availability has increased in much of the world, challenges remain related to acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, further compounded by global inequities in vaccine access and the emergence of new variants. As such, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) continue to be an important tool in slowing and preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. This series of rapid evidence assessments (REA), using the COM-B model as a theoretical framework, sought to understand the existing evidence about who delays or refuses COVID-19 vaccination and who does not adhere to NPI measures, why and in what contexts. The objective is to inform tailored policies and interventions that support vaccination acceptance and adoption of recommended NPI measures, drawing in the COM-B Behaviour Change Wheel. Demographics did not consistently predict non-adherence to protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of psychological capability, people with less COVID-19 knowledge are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and not adhere to social distancing. In terms of social opportunities, people who perceive less social normative pressure to engage in protective behaviours are more likely to not adhere to social distancing and mask wearing recommendations. In terms of reflective motivations, people who perceive the protective behaviour to be less effective are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and avoid mask wearing; people who perceive themselves to have less control over protective behaviours are less likely to adopt social distancing and mask wearing behaviours; and people who perceive themselves to be less susceptible to catching COVID-19 are more likely to avoid or refuse vaccination and to not adhere to mask wearing recommendations. The series of REAs was used to develop an evidence-informed practical toolkit for policy makers and practitioners to inform decision making around future efforts to promote uptake and maintenance of some or all recommended NPIs to mitigate the spread of outbreaks of transmissible respiratory diseases, including potential new and emerging pandemic threats.
Predictors of protective behaviours to prevent the community spread of SARS-COV-2
Publication

Predictors of protective behaviours to prevent the community spread of SARS-COV-2

As vaccine availability has increased in much of the world, challenges remain related to acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, further compounded by global inequities in vaccine access and the emergence of new variants. As such, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) continue to be an important tool in slowing and preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. This series of rapid evidence assessments (REA), using the COM-B model as a theoretical framework, sought to understand the existing evidence about who delays or refuses COVID-19 vaccination and who does not adhere to NPI measures, why and in what contexts. The objective is to inform tailored policies and interventions that support vaccination acceptance and adoption of recommended NPI measures, drawing in the COM-B Behaviour Change Wheel. Demographics did not consistently predict non-adherence to protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of psychological capability, people with less COVID-19 knowledge are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and not adhere to social distancing. In terms of social opportunities, people who perceive less social normative pressure to engage in protective behaviours are more likely to not adhere to social distancing and mask wearing recommendations. In terms of reflective motivations, people who perceive the protective behaviour to be less effective are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and avoid mask wearing; people who perceive themselves to have less control over protective behaviours are less likely to adopt social distancing and mask wearing behaviours; and people who perceive themselves to be less susceptible to catching COVID-19 are more likely to avoid or refuse vaccination and to not adhere to mask wearing recommendations. The series of REAs was used to develop an evidence-informed practical toolkit for policy makers and practitioners to inform decision making around future efforts to promote uptake and maintenance of some or all recommended NPIs to mitigate the spread of outbreaks of transmissible respiratory diseases, including potential new and emerging pandemic threats.
Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, delay and refusal
Publication

Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, delay and refusal

As vaccine availability has increased in much of the world, challenges remain related to acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, further compounded by global inequities in vaccine access and the emergence of new variants. As such, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) continue to be an important tool in slowing and preventing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. This series of rapid evidence assessments (REA), using the COM-B model as a theoretical framework, sought to understand the existing evidence about who delays or refuses COVID-19 vaccination and who does not adhere to NPI measures, why and in what contexts. The objective is to inform tailored policies and interventions that support vaccination acceptance and adoption of recommended NPI measures, drawing in the COM-B Behaviour Change Wheel. Demographics did not consistently predict non-adherence to protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. In terms of psychological capability, people with less COVID-19 knowledge are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and not adhere to social distancing. In terms of social opportunities, people who perceive less social normative pressure to engage in protective behaviours are more likely to not adhere to social distancing and mask wearing recommendations. In terms of reflective motivations, people who perceive the protective behaviour to be less effective are more likely to delay or refuse vaccination and avoid mask wearing; people who perceive themselves to have less control over protective behaviours are less likely to adopt social distancing and mask wearing behaviours; and people who perceive themselves to be less susceptible to catching COVID-19 are more likely to avoid or refuse vaccination and to not adhere to mask wearing recommendations. The series of REAs was used to develop an evidence-informed practical toolkit for policy makers and practitioners to inform decision making around future efforts to promote uptake and maintenance of some or all recommended NPIs to mitigate the spread of outbreaks of transmissible respiratory diseases, including potential new and emerging pandemic threats.