Measures of ability to learn, grow and make decisions among older persons: a systematic review of measurement properties.

OBJECTIVE: this study aims to conduct a systematic review on available instruments for measuring older persons' ability to learn, grow and make decisions and to critically review the measurement properties of the identified instruments. METHODS: we searched six electronic databases, which include PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, SciELO, ERIC and AgeLine, between January 2000 and April 2022. Reference lists of the included papers were also manually searched. The COSMIN (CONsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) guidelines were used to evaluate the measurement properties and the quality of evidence for each instrument. RESULTS: 13 instruments from 29 studies were included for evaluation of their measurement properties. Of the 13 reviewed, 6 were on the ability to learn, 3 were on the ability to grow and 4 were on the ability to make decisions. The review found no single instrument that measured all three constructs in unidimensional or multidimensional scales. Many of the instruments were found to have sufficient overall rating on content validity, structural validity, internal consistency and cross-cultural validity. The quality of evidence was rated as low due to a limited number of related validation studies. CONCLUSION: a few existing instruments to assess the ability to learn, grow and make decisions of older people can be identified in the literature. Further research is needed in validating them against functional, real-world outcomes.

A unified framework for the measurement of mobility in older persons.

Mobility is often referred to as a 'sixth vital sign' because of its ability to predict critical health outcomes in later adulthood. In the World Health Organization (WHO) World Report on Aging and Health, mobility is described as movement in all its forms whether powered by the body or a vehicle. As such, mobility encompasses basic physical actions such as getting up from a chair and walking, as well as activities such as exercising, driving and using public transportation. A plethora of measurement tools have been developed to assess various aspects of mobility; however, there is wide variability in the mobility constructs being measured which limits standardisation and meaningful comparison across studies. In this paper, we propose a comprehensive framework for measuring mobility that considers three distinct facets of mobility: perceived mobility ability ('what can you do'), actual mobility ability ('what you actually do') and locomotor capacity for mobility ('what could you do'). These three facets of mobility are rooted in the three components of healthy aging endorsed by the WHO: functional ability, intrinsic capacity and environments. By proposing a unified framework for measuring mobility based on theory and empirical evidence, we can advance the science of monitoring and managing mobility to ensure functional ability in older age.

A systematic review of measures of ability to meet basic needs in older persons.

BACKGROUND: The ability of older persons to meet their basic needs (i.e. personal, financial and housing security), as well as to perform Activities of Daily Living (ADL), is crucial. It is unclear, however, whether such measures exist. This systematic review aimed to review English-language measures of the ability of older persons to meet their basic needs, and to critically review the comprehensiveness of these measures and their psychometric properties. METHODS: Fifteen electronic databases including PubMed, EBSCOhost and CINAHL were systematically searched for studies of measures that assessed the ability of older persons to meet their basic needs, as defined by the World Health Organization. Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion in the review and evaluated their comprehensiveness and psychometrics. RESULTS: We found seven instruments from 62 studies that assessed multi-domain function including ADL and some elements of basic needs. The instruments varied in breadth and in reporting of key psychometric criteria. Further, no single instrument provided a comprehensive assessment of the ability of older persons to meet their basic needs. CONCLUSION: No single instrument that measures the ability to meet basic needs was identified by this review. Further research is needed to develop an instrument that assesses the ability of older persons to meet their basic needs. This measure should include an evaluation of ADL.

Measurement properties of instruments to measure the fatigue domain of vitality capacity in community-dwelling older people: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vitality capacity (VC) is a key domain of intrinsic capacity (IC) and is the underlying biophysiological aspect of IC. Energy and metabolism (E&M) is one of the domains of VC. Fatigue is one of the main characteristics of E&M. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this umbrella review are (i) to identify the available instruments suitable for measuring fatigue in community-dwelling older adults and (ii) to critically review the measurement properties of the identified instruments. DESIGN: Umbrella review. SETTING: Healthcare. SUBJECTS: Community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: PubMed and Web of Knowledge were systematically screened for systematic reviews and meta-analysis reporting on fatigue instruments resulting in 2,263 articles (last search 5 December 2022). The COSMIN checklist was used to appraise psychometric properties and the AMSTAR for assessing methodological quality. Data on fatigue instruments, construct, reference period, assessment method, validated population, reliability, validity, responsiveness and predictive validity on negative health outcomes were extracted. RESULTS: 10 systematic reviews and 1 meta-analysis were included in this study. 70 fatigue instruments were identified in the literature and 21 were originally designed for fatigue. The Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Pittsburgh Fatigability Scale (PFS) and Visual Analogue scale (VAS-F), Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS) and the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue (FACIT-F) presented good psychometric properties. CONCLUSIONS: The FSS, FIS, FACIT-F, PFS and the VAS-F presented good psychometric properties in various conditions. Therefore, these instruments could be used to quantify trajectories in the domain E&M in the context of VC in community-dwelling older adults.

Measures of perceived mobility ability in community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review of psychometric properties.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to synthesise the psychometric properties of measures of perceived mobility ability and related frameworks used to define and operationalise mobility in community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: We registered the review protocol with PROSPERO (CRD42022306689) and included studies that examined the psychometric properties of perceived mobility measures in community-dwelling older adults. Five databases were searched to identify potentially relevant primary studies. We qualitatively summarised psychometric property estimates and related operational frameworks. We conducted risk of bias and overall quality assessments, and meta-analyses when at least three studies were included for a particular outcome. The synthesised results were compared against the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments criteria for good measurement properties. RESULTS: A total of 36 studies and 17 measures were included in the review. The Late-Life Function and Disability Index: function component (LLFDI-FC), lower extremity functional scale (LEFS), Mobility Assessment Tool (MAT)-short form (MAT-SF) or MAT-Walking, and Perceived Driving Abilities (PDA) Scale were identified with three or more eligible studies. Most measures showed sufficient test-retest reliability (moderate or high), while the PDA scale showed insufficient reliability (low). Most measures had sufficient or inconsistent convergent validity (low or moderate) or known-groups validity (low or very low), but their predictive validity and responsiveness were insufficient or inconsistent (low or very low). Few studies used a conceptual model. CONCLUSION: The LLFDI-FC, LEFS, PDA and MAT-SF/Walking can be used in community-dwelling older adults by considering the summarised psychometric properties. No available comprehensive mobility measure was identified that covered all mobility domains.

Measures of attributes of locomotor capacity in older people: a systematic literature review following the COSMIN methodology.

BACKGROUND: Locomotor capacity (LC) is an important domain of intrinsic capacity and key determinant of functional ability and well-being in older age. The United Nations Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021-2030) calls for strengthening data and research on healthy ageing, including the measurement of older persons' LC. To advance the measurement and monitoring of LC, there is pressing need to identify valid and reliable measures. OBJECTIVE: To identify all the available tools that were validated for measurement of LC or of its specific attributes in older people and to assess the methodological quality of the studies and measurement properties of the tools. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: Anywhere (Community-dwelling; long-term care facility; etc.). SUBJECTS: Older people. METHODS: We used highly sensitive search strategies to search the following databases: Medline, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycINFO. The study was conducted following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic review of outcome measurement instruments. RESULTS: A total of 125 studies were included, which assessed tools for balance (n = 84), muscle power (n = 12), muscle strength (n = 32, including four studies about tools for balance and muscle power) and endurance (n = 1). No studies on tools for muscle function, joint function, or locomotor capacity overall, were retrieved. We identified 69 clinician-report or objective assessment tools for balance, 30 for muscle strength, 12 for muscle power and 1 endurance assessment tool. The GRADE assessment of quality of evidence showed that only a few tools have high quality evidence for both sufficient validity and reliability: The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), the Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest), the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test. CONCLUSIONS: A few tools with high quality evidence for sufficient validity and reliability are currently available for balance assessment in older people that may be recommended for use in clinical and research settings. Further validation studies are required for muscle strength, muscle power and endurance assessment tools.

Assessing the measurement properties of life-space mobility measures in community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Preserving and enhancing mobility is an important part of healthy ageing. Life-space mobility is a construct that captures actual mobility within the home and the community. The objective of this systematic review was to synthesise the measurement properties and interpretability of scores produced by life-space mobility measures in community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: This systematic review followed Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). Multiple databases were searched to identify potentially relevant articles. Data extraction and assessment of methodological quality was conducted by two independent reviewers. When possible, results were quantitatively pooled for each measurement property. If studies could not be combined quantitatively, then findings were summarised qualitatively using means and percentage of confirmed hypothesis. Synthesised results were assessed against the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties. RESULTS: A total of 21 full text articles were included in the review. The University of Alabama at Birmingham Study of Aging Life-Space Assessment (LSA) was the most evaluated life-space mobility measure. The LSA demonstrated content validity, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.80-0.92), reliability [intra-class correlation value 0.89 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.80, 0.94)] and convergent validity with measures of physical function in community-dwelling older adults. CONCLUSION: This systematic review summarised the measurement properties of life-space mobility measures in community-dwelling older adults following COSMIN guidelines. The LSA has been translated into multiple languages and has sufficient measurement properties for assessing life-space mobility among community-dwelling older adults.

A systematic review of the measurement properties of aspects of psychological capacity in older adults.

OBJECTIVE: to examine the measurement properties of instruments that have been used to measure aspects of psychological capacity in adults aged 60 years and over. METHODS: the databases PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMCARE and Scopus from 2010 were searched using search terms related to psychological capacity, older persons and measurement properties. Both data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment were conducted using the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) criteria using Covidence software. RESULTS: the full text of 326 articles were reviewed and a total of 30 studies were included, plus two further articles identified from reference lists (n = 32). No single instrument measuring psychological capacity was identified. Twenty (n = 20) instruments were identified that measure seven constructs of psychological capacity: Resilience; Sense of coherence; Hope; Mindfulness; Optimism; Attachment to life; Emotional regulation. CONCLUSIONS: this systematic review identified potential measures of psychological capacity in older adults. The review will inform further work to develop a single comprehensive measure of psychological capacity in older adults.

A systematic review of reviews on the psychometric properties of measures of older persons' ability to build and maintain social relationships.

BACKGROUND: Within the scope of the World Health Organisation's (WHO) world report on ageing and health and how healthy ageing was conceptualised, the WHO has been working with academia towards producing reviews of the psychometric properties of instruments that measure different domains of functional ability. This study aimed to conduct a review of reviews to examine existing and validated instruments measuring the ability of older persons to build and maintain social relationships and to evaluate the psychometric properties of these instruments. METHODS: We searched for studies published in the English, Spanish and Portuguese languages. No restrictions were placed on the year of publication. The following databases were searched: PubMed, Embase, Psyinfo and Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Titles and abstracts were screened and selected articles were screened and reviewed independently by two reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 3,879 records were retrieved, of which 39 records were retrieved for full-text analysis. None of the reviews met the inclusion criteria, thus resulting in an empty review. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the current definition of older persons' functional ability to build and maintain social relationships, this review did not identify instruments that can measure both constructs simultaneously. We suggest the development of an instrument that simultaneously assesses the ability of older persons to build and maintain relationships.

Psychometric properties of ability to contribute measurements as a domain of functional ability of older persons: a COSMIN systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Older person's ability to contribute covers contributions divided into five subdomains: assisting friends and neighbours, mentoring peers and younger people, caring for family, engaging in the workforce and voluntary activity. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of ability to contribute measurements as a domain of functional ability of older persons using Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic reviews. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO databases, for observational studies published within the last 10 years. The measurement properties of these ability measures were evaluated against the COSMIN taxonomy. Risk-of-bias assessment was performed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. RESULTS: Of the 32,665 studies identified, we selected 19, of which the main purpose was to develop or validate an instrument or have related items that measure at least one of the subdomains. None of the instruments contained items that were fully related to the five subdomains, 60% (n = 12) were related to voluntary activities and 15% (n = 3) to mentoring peers and younger people. As for psychometric properties, two studies assessed content validity. Factor analysis was used to evaluate structural validity in 10 studies. Internal consistency was evaluated in 63% of the instruments and Cronbach's alpha ranges from 0.63 to 0.92. No study reported predictive validity. A very limited overview of their scope and limitations for their application was observed. CONCLUSIONS: We found no single instrument measuring all subdomains of ability to contribute. We found several instruments containing items that could indirectly measure some of the subdomains of the ability to contribute.

The UN Decade of healthy ageing: strengthening measurement for monitoring health and wellbeing of older people.

Over the past 100 years, life expectancy has increased dramatically in nearly all nations. Yet, these extra years of life gained have not all been healthy, particularly for older people aged 60 years and over. In 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO) and United Nations (UN) member states embraced a sweeping 10-year global plan of action to ensure all older people can live long and healthy lives, formally known as the UN Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021-2030). With the adoption of the UN Decade of Healthy Ageing resolution, countries are committed to implementing collaborative actions to improve the lives of older people, their families and the communities in which they reside. The Decade addresses four interconnected areas of action. Adopting the UN's resolution on the Decade of Healthy Ageing has caused excitement, but a question that has weighed on everyone's mind is how governments will be held accountable? Besides, there have been no goals or targets set for the UN Decade of Healthy Ageing from a programmatic perspective for the action areas, and guidance on measures, data collection, analysis and reporting are urgently needed to support global, regional and national monitoring of the national strategies, programmes and policies. To this end, WHO in collaboration with UN agencies and international agencies established a Technical Advisory Group for Measurement of Healthy Ageing (TAG4MHA) to provide advice on the measurement, monitoring and evaluation of the UN Decade of Healthy Ageing at the global, regional and national levels.

Interventions addressing functional abilities of older people in rural and remote areas: a scoping review of available evidence based on WHO functional ability domains.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) encourages healthy ageing strategies to help develop and maintain older people's functional abilities in five domains: their ability to meet basic needs; learn, grow, and make decisions; be mobile; build and maintain relationships, and contribute to society. This scoping review reports the available evidence-based interventions that have been undertaken with people ≥ 50 years of age in rural and remote areas and the outcomes of those interventions relevant to enhancing functional ability. METHODS: The scoping review was undertaken following the JBI methodology. A literature search was carried out to identify published intervention studies for enhancing functional ability in older people living in rural and remote settings. The databases searched included CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest Central, PubMed, EBSCOHost, APA PsycInfo, Carin.info, and the European Network for Rural Development Projects and Practice database. Gray literature sources included government reports, websites, policy papers, online newsletters, and studies from a bibliographic hand search of included studies. RESULTS: Literature published from January 2010 to March 9, 2021 were included for review. A total of 67 studies were identified, including quasi-experimental studies (n = 44), randomized controlled trials (n = 22), and a descriptive study. Five main types of interventions were conducted in rural and remote areas with older people: Community Services, Education and Training, Exercise and Physical Activity, Health Promotion Programmes, and Telehealth. Health Promotion Programmes (n = 28, 41.8%) were the most frequently reported interventions. These focused primarily on improving the ability to meet basic needs. About half (n = 35, 52.2%) of the included studies were linked to the ability to learn, grow, and make decisions, and 40% of studies (n = 27) were relevant to the ability to be mobile. Only a very limited number of intervention studies were geared towards outcomes such as maintaining relationships (n = 6) and contributing to society (n = 3). CONCLUSION: Interventions for enhancing functional ability focused primarily on the ability to meet basic needs. We identified the need for health-related interventions in rural and remote areas to consider all five functional ability domains as outcomes, particularly to strengthen the psychosocial wellbeing of older people and enhance their sense of purpose through their contributions to society.

The prevalence of elder abuse in institutional settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: A recent study has shown that close to one in six older adults have experienced elder abuse in a community setting in the past year. It is thought that abuse in institutions is just as prevalent. Few systematic evidence of the scale of the problem exists in elder care facilities. The aim of this review is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the problem in institutional settings and to provide estimates of the prevalence of elder abuse in the past 12 months. Methods: Fourteen academic databases and other online platforms were systematically searched for studies on elder abuse. Additionally, 26 experts in the field were consulted to identify further studies. All studies were screened for inclusion criteria by two independent reviewers. Data were extracted, and meta-analysis was conducted. Self-reported data from older residents and staff were considered separately. Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria from an initial of 55 studies identified for review. Overall abuse estimates, based on staff reports, suggest that 64.2% of staff admitted to elder abuse in the past year. There were insufficient studies to calculate an overall prevalence estimate based on self-reported data from older residents. Prevalence estimates for abuse subtypes reported by older residents were highest for psychological abuse (33.4%), followed by physical (14.1%), financial (13.8%), neglect (11.6%), and sexual abuse (1.9%). Conclusions: The prevalence of elder abuse in institutions is high. Global action to improve surveillance and monitoring of institutional elder abuse is vital to inform policy action to prevent elder abuse.

New WHO Violence Prevention Information System, an interactive knowledge platform of scientific findings on violence.

Scientific information on violence can be difficult to compile and understand. It is scattered across websites, databases, technical reports and academic journals, and rarely addresses all types of violence. In response, in October 2017 WHO released the Violence Prevention Information System or Violence Info, an online interactive collection of scientific information about the prevalence, consequences, risk factors and preventability of all forms of interpersonal violence. It covers homicide, child maltreatment, youth violence, intimate partner violence, elder abuse and sexual violence.

Global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention: a modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: To establish global research priorities for interpersonal violence prevention using a systematic approach. METHODS: Research priorities were identified in a three-round process involving two surveys. In round 1, 95 global experts in violence prevention proposed research questions to be ranked in round 2. Questions were collated and organized according to the four-step public health approach to violence prevention. In round 2, 280 international experts ranked the importance of research in the four steps, and the various substeps, of the public health approach. In round 3, 131 international experts ranked the importance of detailed research questions on the public health step awarded the highest priority in round 2. FINDINGS: In round 2, "developing, implementing and evaluating interventions" was the step of the public health approach awarded the highest priority for four of the six types of violence considered (i.e. child maltreatment, intimate partner violence, armed violence and sexual violence) but not for youth violence or elder abuse. In contrast, "scaling up interventions and evaluating their cost-effectiveness" was ranked lowest for all types of violence. In round 3, research into "developing, implementing and evaluating interventions" that addressed parenting or laws to regulate the use of firearms was awarded the highest priority. The key limitations of the study were response and attrition rates among survey respondents. However, these rates were in line with similar priority-setting exercises. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest it is premature to scale up violence prevention interventions. Developing and evaluating smaller-scale interventions should be the funding priority.

Methods for conducting systematic reviews of risk factors in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Rates of youth violence are disproportionately high in many low- and middle-income countries [LMICs] but existing reviews of risk factors focus almost exclusively on high-income countries. Different search strategies, including non-English language searches, might be required to identify relevant evidence in LMICs. This paper discusses methodological issues in systematic reviews aiming to include evidence from LMICs, using the example of a recent review of risk factors for child conduct problems and youth violence in LMICs. METHODS: We searched the main international databases, such as PsycINFO, Medline and EMBASE in English, as well as 12 regional databases in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Russian. In addition, we used internet search engines and Google Scholar, and contacted over 200 researchers and organizations to identify potentially eligible studies in LMICs. RESULTS: The majority of relevant studies were identified in the mainstream databases, but additional studies were also found through regional databases, such as CNKI, Wangfang, LILACS and SciELO. Overall, 85% of eligible studies were in English, and 15% were reported in Chinese, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian or French. Among eligible studies in languages other than English, two-thirds were identified only by regional databases and one-third was also indexed in the main international databases. CONCLUSIONS: There are many studies on child conduct problems and youth violence in LMICs which have not been included in prior reviews. Most research on these subjects in LMICs has been produced in the last two-three decades and mostly in middle-income countries, such as China, Brazil, Turkey, South Africa and Russia. Based on our findings, it appears that many studies of child conduct problems and youth violence in LMICs are reported in English, Chinese, Spanish and Portuguese, but few such studies are published in French, Arabic or Russian. If non-English language searches and screening had not been conducted in the current review, 15% of eligible studies would have been missed. Although there are benefits to non-English language searches and the inclusion of non-English studies in meta-analyses, systematic reviewers also need to consider the resources required to incorporate multi-lingual research.

Global development and diffusion of outcome evaluation research for interpersonal and self-directed violence prevention from 2007 to 2013: A systematic review.

Through a global review, we identified gaps in the geographical distribution of violence prevention evidence outcome evaluation studies and the types of violence addressed. Systematic literature searches identified 355 articles published between 2007 and 2013 that evaluated programs to prevent interpersonal or self-directed violence; focused on universal or selected populations; and reported outcomes measuring violence or closely related risk factors. The number of studies identified increased annually from 2008 (n = 37), reaching 64 in 2013. Over half (n = 203) of all studies focused on youth violence yet only one on elder maltreatment. Study characteristics varied by year and violence type. Only 9.3% of all studies had been conducted in LMICs. These studies were less likely than those in high income countries (HICs) to have tested established interventions yet more likely to involve international collaboration. Evaluation studies successfully established in LMIC had often capitalized on other major regional priorities (e.g. HIV). Relationships between violence and social determinants, communicable and non-communicable diseases, and even economic prosperity should be explored as mechanisms to increase the global reach of violence prevention research. Results should inform future research strategies and provide a baseline for measuring progress in developing the violence prevention evidence-base, especially in LMICs.

Prevalence and risk of violence against adults with disabilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

BACKGROUND: About 15% of adults worldwide have a disability. These individuals are frequently reported to be at increased risk of violence, yet quantitative syntheses of studies of this issue are scarce. We aimed to quantify violence against adults with disabilities. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched 12 electronic databases to identify primary research studies published between Jan 1, 1990, and Aug 17, 2010, reporting prevalence estimates of violence against adults (aged mainly ≥18 years) with disabilities, or their risk of violence compared with non-disabled adults. We included only studies reporting violence occurring within the 12 months before the study. We assessed studies with six core quality criteria, and pooled data for analysis. FINDINGS: Of 10,663 references initially identified, 26 were eligible for inclusion, with data for 21,557 individuals with disabilities. 21 studies provided data suitable for meta-analysis of prevalence of violence, and ten for meta-analysis of risks of violence. Pooled prevalence of any (physical, sexual, or intimate partner) recent violence was 24·3% (95% CI 18·3-31·0) in people with mental illnesses, 6·1% (2·5-11·1) in those with intellectual impairments, and 3·2% (2·5-4·1) in those with non-specific impairments. We identified substantial heterogeneity in most prevalence estimates (I(2) >75%). We noted large uncertainty around pooled risk estimates. Pooled crude odds ratios for the risk of violence in disabled compared with non-disabled individuals were 1·50 (95% CI 1·09-2·05) for all studies combined, 1·31 (0·93-1·84) for people with non-specific impairments, 1·60 (1·05-2·45) for people with intellectual impairments, and 3·86 (0·91-16·43) for those with mental illnesses. INTERPRETATION: Adults with disabilities are at a higher risk of violence than are non-disabled adults, and those with mental illnesses could be particularly vulnerable. However, available studies have methodological weaknesses and gaps exist in the types of disability and violence they address. Robust studies are absent for most regions of the world, particularly low-income and middle-income countries. FUNDING: WHO Department of Violence and Injury Prevention and Disability.