"The World Health Organisation had just published a generic assessment instrument to measure general health and disability levels: the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHODAS 2.0. WHODAS 2.0 is based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). It was developed and tested internationally and is applicable in different cultures both in general populations and in clinical settings. It can be used as a general measure across all diseases. This manual is aimed at public health professionals, doctor, other health professionals (for example rehabilitation professionals, physical therapists and occupational therapists), health policy planners, social scientists and others involved in studies on disability and health." -- Publisher.

The U.S. Social Security Administration (SSA) provides disability benefits through the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs. To receive SSDI or SSI disability benefits, an individual must meet the statutory definition of disability, which is "the inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity [SGA] by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months." SSA uses a five-step sequential process to determine whether an adult applicant meets this definition. Functional Assessment for Adults with Disabilities examines ways to collect information about an individual's physical and mental (cognitive and noncognitive) functional abilities relevant to work requirements. This report discusses the types of information that support findings of limitations in functional abilities relevant to work requirements, and provides findings and conclusions regarding the collection of information and assessment of functional abilities relevant to work requirements.

The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) provides systematic epidemiological estimates for an unprecedented 150 major health conditions. The GBD provides indispensable global and regional data for health planning, research, and education.

The National Roundtable on Health Care Quality was established in 1995 by the Institute of Medicine. The Roundtable consists of experts formally appointed through procedures of the National Research Council (NRC) who represent both public and private-sector perspectives and appropriate areas of substantive expertise (not organizations). From the public sector, heads of appropriate Federal agencies serve. It offers a unique, nonadversarial environment to explore ongoing rapid changes in the medical marketplace and the implications of these changes for the quality of health and health care in this nation. The Roundtable has a liaison panel focused on quality of care in managed care organizations. The Roundtable convenes nationally prominent representatives of the private and public sector (regional, state and federal), academia, patients, and the health media to analyze unfolding issues concerning quality, to hold workshops and commission papers on significant topics, and when appropriate, to produce periodic statements for the nation on quality of care matters. By providing a structured opportunity for regular communication and interaction, the Roundtable fosters candid discussion among individuals who represent various sides of a given issue.

This book argues that health measurements are given artificial authority if they are particularly amenable to calculability and easy measurement, and shows that problems often coalesce around disabilities that do not lend themselves to easy quantification.

Sixth edition of the hugely successful, internationally recognised textbook on global public health and epidemiology, with 3 volumes comprehensively covering the scope, methods, and practice of the discipline

The World Report on Disability suggests more than a billion people totally experience disability. They generally have poorer health, lower education and fewer economic opportunities and higher rates of poverty than people without disabilities. This report provides the best available evidence about what works to overcome barriers to better care and services.

Worldwide economic constraints on health care systems have highlighted the importance of evidence-based medicine and evidence-based health policy. The resulting clinical trials and health services research studies require instruments to monitor the outcomes of care and the output of the health system. However, the over-abundance of competing measurement scales can make choosing a measure difficult at best. Measuring Health provides in-depth reviews of over 100 of the leading health measurement tools and serves as a guide for choosing among them.LNow in its third edition, this book provides a critical overview of the field of health measurement, with a technical introduction and discussion of the history and future directions for the field. This latest edition updates the information on each of the measures previously reviewed, and includes a complete new chapter on anxiety measurement to accompany the one on depression. It has also added new instruments to those previously reviewed in each of the chapters in the book.LChapters cover measurements of physical disability, social health, psychological well-being, anxiety, depression, mental status testing, pain, general health status and quality of life. Each chapter presents a tabular comparison of the quality of the instruments reviewed, followed by a detailed description of each method, covering its purpose and conceptual basis, its reliability and validity and, where possible, shows a copy of the actual scale. To ensure accuracy of the information, each review has been approved by the original author of each instrument or by an acknowledged expert.

The Social Security Administration (SSA) is engaged in redesigning its disability determination process for providing cash benefits and medical assistance to blind and disabled persons under the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) program and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program (Title II and Title XVI of the Social Security Act). The agency has undertaken a multiyear research effort to develop and test the feasibility, validity, reliability, and practicality of the redesigned disability determination process before making any decision about its national implementation. Survey Measurement of Work Disability reviews and provides advice on this research. One of the major areas for review is the ongoing independent, scientific review of the scope of work, design, and content of the Disability Evaluation Study (DES) and the conduct of the study by the chosen survey contractor. This report identifies statistical design, methodological, and content concerns and addresses other issues as they arise.

How do the benefits of higher education compare with its costs, and how does this comparison vary across individuals and institutions? These questions are fundamental to quantifying the productivity of the education sector. The studies in Productivity in Higher Education use rich and novel administrative data, modern econometric methods, and careful institutional analysis to explore productivity issues. The authors examine the returns to undergraduate education, differences in costs by major, the productivity of for-profit schools, the productivity of various types of faculty and of outcomes, the effects of online education on the higher education market, and the ways in which the productivity of different institutions responds to market forces. The analyses recognize five key challenges to assessing productivity in higher education: the potential for multiple student outcomes in terms of skills, earnings, invention, and employment; the fact that colleges and universities are “multiproduct” firms that conduct varied activities across many domains; the fact that students select which school to attend based in part on their aptitude; the difficulty of attributing outcomes to individual institutions when students attend more than one; and the possibility that some of the benefits of higher education may arise from the system as a whole rather than from a single institution. The findings and the approaches illustrated can facilitate decision-making processes in higher education.