Disability-related inequalities in the prevalence of loneliness across the lifespan: trends from Australia, 2003 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Experiencing loneliness can be distressing and increasing evidence indicates that being lonely is associated with poor physical and mental health outcomes. Cross-sectional studies have demonstrated that people with disability have increased risk of experiencing loneliness compared to people without disability. However, we do not know if these inequalities have changed over time. This study investigated the prevalence of loneliness for people with disability in Australia annually from 2003 to 2020 to examine whether disability-related inequalities in loneliness have changed over time, and disaggregated results for subgroups of people with disability by age group, sex, and disability group.

METHODS

We used annual data (2003-2020) from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey. Loneliness was measured by a single question assessing the subjective experience of loneliness. For each wave, we calculated population-weighted age-standardised estimates of the proportion of people experiencing loneliness for people with and without disability. We then calculated the absolute and relative inequalities in loneliness between people with and without disability for each wave. Analyses were stratified by 10-year age groups, sex, and disability group (sensory or speech, physical, intellectual or learning, psychological, brain injury or stroke, other).

RESULTS

From 2003 to 2020, the prevalence of loneliness was greater for people with disability, such that people with disability were 1.5 to 1.9 times more likely to experience loneliness than people without disability. While the prevalence of loneliness decreased for people without disability between 2003 and 2020, the prevalence of loneliness did not decrease for people with disability during this period. Inequalities in loneliness were more substantial for people with intellectual or learning disabilities, psychological disability, and brain injury or stroke.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that people with disability have increased risk of loneliness compared to people without disability. We add to the existing evidence by demonstrating that disability-related inequalities in loneliness have persisted for two decades in Australia without improvement. Our findings indicate that addressing inequalities in loneliness for people with disability is a critical public health concern given that loneliness is associated with a wide range of poor health outcomes.

Developing self-report disability questions for a voluntary patient registration form for general practice in Australia

OBJECTIVE

This article reports on research undertaken to develop self-report disability questions for a patient registration form that may be implemented in general practices across Australia as part of a voluntary patient registration program.

METHODS

There were four research components: rapid review of approaches for capturing disability information; expert informant interviews (n=19); stakeholder consultation via virtual focus groups (n=65); and online survey (n=35). Findings from each component informed development of materials for subsequent components in an iterative research process.

RESULTS

Three disability questions were developed: two alternative questions for identifying disability, conceptually aligned with the operational definition of disability in Australia's national disability survey; one question to determine the patient's disability group/s.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge and perspectives from a variety of sources informed the development of self-report questions to identify patients with disability. Implementing these questions represents an opportunity to test new ways of capturing disability information suited to mainstream service provision contexts. It will be essential to evaluate the quality of the data produced during the initial period of implementation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH

The collection of self-report patient disability information within general practice, using standard and conceptually-sound questions, has the potential to support improved provision of health care to patients with disability.

A call to action for more disability-inclusive health policy and systems research

To date, the exclusion of people with disability participating in research has limited the evidence base informing health system strengthening policy and practice more generally, and addressing disability-related inequalities in access to health services and better health outcomes more particularly. Given that more than 1 billion people, or 16% of the world's population, have a disability, we may fail to respond to the needs of a large proportion of the population unless we are purposeful with inclusion. Our research in this area indicates that online qualitative methods can be effective in engaging under-represented groups and are essential to ensure their input into health policy and systems research. This has important implications for researchers whose responsibility it is to make all health research disability inclusive, for ethical and methodological reasons, so they do not perpetuate the under-representation of people with disability in health policy and systems research. Our paper puts forward several recommendations to facilitate more people with disability participating in health policy and systems research. By critically reflecting on a health system strengthening research project, in which we purposefully aimed to support the participation of people with disability, we identify lessons learnt and issues to consider when planning and conducting accessible research. We also propose a set of actions for moving the agenda forward.

Access to general practice for people with intellectual disability in Australia: a systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

People with intellectual disability experience inadequate access to general practice and poorer health outcomes than the general population. While some access barriers have been identified for this population, these studies have often used narrow definitions of access, which may not encompass the multiple dimensions that influence access to general practice. To address this gap, we conducted a scoping review to identify factors impacting access to general practice for people with intellectual disability in Australia, using a holistic framework of access conceptualised by Levesque and colleagues.

METHODS

This scoping review followed Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. Medline (Ovid), Scopus, CINAHL, Informit and PsycINFO databases were searched. Screening, full-text review and data extraction were completed by two independent reviewers, with consensus reached at each stage of the study. Data were extracted, coded and synthesised through deductive qualitative analysis - using the five corresponding conceptual dimensions within Levesque and colleagues' theoretical framework of access, which incorporate both supply-side features of health systems and services, and demand-side characteristics of consumers and populations.

RESULTS

The search identified 1364 publications. After duplicate removal, title and abstract screening and full-text review, 44 publications were included. Supply-side factors were more commonly reported than demand-side factors, with the following issues frequently identified as impacting access to general practice: limited general practitioner education about, and/or experience of, people with intellectual disability; communication difficulties; and inadequate continuity of care. Less frequently included were factors such as the health literacy levels, promotion of general practice services and availability of complete medical records.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first scoping review to assess access barriers for people with intellectual disability using a comprehensive conceptualisation of access. The findings highlight the need for increased efforts to address demand-side dimensions of access to general practice and offer a basis for a balanced portfolio of strategies that can support recent policy initiatives to enhance access to care for people with intellectual disability.

Do Area-Level Environmental Factors Influence Employment for People with Disability? A Scoping Review

Employment is an important social determinant of health and wellbeing. People with disability experience labour market disadvantage and have low labour force participation rates, high unemployment rates, and poor work conditions. Environmental factors are crucial as facilitators of or barriers to participation for people with disability. Understanding how the physical, social, and economic characteristics of local areas influence employment for people with disability can potentially inform interventions to reduce employment inequalities. We conducted a scoping review of research investigating associations between area-level environmental factors and employment for people with disability. Eighteen articles published between 2000 and 2020 met the inclusion criteria, and data were extracted to map the current evidence. Area-level factors were categorised into six domains relating to different aspects of environmental context: socioeconomic environment, services, physical environment, social environment, governance, and urbanicity. The urbanicity and socioeconomic environment domains were the most frequently represented (15 and 8 studies, respectively). The studies were heterogeneous in terms of methods and data sources, scale and type of geographic units used for analysis, disability study population, and examined employment outcomes. We conclude that the current evidence base is insufficient to inform the design of interventions. Priorities for future research are identified, which include further theorising the mechanisms by which area-level factors may influence employment outcomes, quantifying the contribution of specific factors, and interrogating specific factors underlying the association between urbanicity and employment outcomes for people with disability.

Health Statistics in Australia: What We Know and Do Not Know

Australia is a federation of six states and two territories (the States). These eight governmental entities share responsibility for health and health services with the Australian Government. Mortality statistics, including causes of death, have been collected since the late 19th century, with national data produced by the (now) Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) from 1907. Each State introduced hospital in-patient statistics, assisted by State offices of the ABS. Beginning in the 1970s, the ABS conducts regular health surveys, including specific collections on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Overall, Australia now has a comprehensive array of health statistics, published regularly without political or commercial interference. Privacy and confidentiality are guaranteed by legislation. Data linkage has grown and become widespread. However, there are gaps, as papers in this issue demonstrate. Most notably, data on primary care patients and encounters reveal stark gaps. This paper accompanies a range of papers from expert authors across the health statistics spectrum in Australia. It is hoped that the collection of papers will inform interested readers and stand as a comprehensive review of the strengths and weaknesses of Australian health statistics in the early 2020s.

Health and Access to Health Services for People with Disability in Australia: Data and Data Gaps

The right of people with disability to enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health without discrimination on the basis of disability is enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). Among its obligations as a signatory to the CRPD, Australia is required to collect appropriate information, including statistical and research data, to inform development and implementation of policies to give effect to the Convention. In this commentary, we first describe how the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) conceptual model of disability can be operationalised in statistical data collections, with a focus on how this is achieved in key Australian data sources such that people with disability can be identified as a population group. We then review existing statistical data on health and health service use for people with disability in Australia, highlighting data gaps and limitations. Finally, we outline priorities and considerations for improving data on health and access to health services for people with disability. As well as conceptual, practical, and ethical considerations, a key principle that must guide future disability data development is that people with disability and their representative organisations must be involved and participate fully in the development of disability data and statistics, and in their use.

1074The role of epidemiology in improving the health of people with disability

Focus and outcomes for participants

The symposium will focus on the role of epidemiologists in building an evidence base to improve the health of the 15% of the world’s population with disability who currently experience vast health inequalities. Participants will be introduced to new ways of conceptualising disability in epidemiology; state of the art approaches to monitoring disability-related socio-economic and health inequalities; methodological challenges and solutions to address the biases due to misclassification, confounding and reverse causation; and the application of causal mediation analysis and natural experiments in identifying potential policy solutions. Participants will gain a greater understanding of how epidemiological methods can be applied to improve the health of people with disability, as well as insights and ideas for their research. A network of epidemiologists interested in this topic will be generated to foster ongoing communication and collaborative opportunities.

Rationale for the symposium, including for its inclusion in the Congress

The health of disabled people has largely been ignored by epidemiologists. This is despite emerging evidence that people with disability experience poorer health because of factors unrelated to their impairment, including socio-economic disadvantage, discrimination, and violence. However, turning epidemiologists’ efforts to the health of people with disability presents conceptual and methodological challenges, some of which are unique to the content area. Participants will be shown a suite of approaches that can be deployed to address these problems. Participatory methods and innovative graphical and statistical methods for analysing disability-related health inequalities, approaches rarely used in epidemiology, will be covered. The symposium will also concentrate on the application of methods to optimise causal inference in the presence of multiple potential biases, and methods that simulate randomised controlled trial conditions to model policy interventions.

Presentation program

The presentations are from researchers from the CRE-DH, funded through Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council organised four themes.

Theme 1: Conceptualisation of disability

We will present findings from a scoping review of original articles in epidemiology journals and will argue that, while, disability is usually conceptualised in epidemiology as an outcome, reconceiving of disability as an exposure, mediator and/or effect modifier can provide important insights on the determinants of health of people with disability.

Theme 2: Monitoring disability-related inequalities

We will demonstrate how the CRE-DH has used participatory methods, where people with disability are ‘experts through lived experience’, to develop indicators to monitor disability-related inequalities and design a National Community Attitudes survey. We will demonstrate innovative ways to graphically illustrate prevalence, absolute and relative inequalities simultaneously, and discuss how hierarchical Bayesian methods can be used to overcome inadequate power due to disaggregation and assess inequalities under uncertainty.

Theme 3: Approaches to minimising bias

We will talk about how biases can affect estimates of disability prevalence and disability-outcome associations, including reverse causation, confounding and misclassification. We will discuss a range of approaches we have used to address these challenges including modelling incident (rather than prevalent) disability, using fixed effects models and propensity score approaches, and approaches to addressing misclassification bias drawing on examples from our program of research.

Theme 4: Identification of policy interventions

We will discuss methods that can be used to model the impact of policies on the health of people with disability using examples from our research. We will present the results of a causal mediation analysis modelling the impact of different employment policy interventions on mental health outcomes. We will illustrate the value of natural policy experiments for estimating effects of policy changes on employment and health of people with disability using two examples – the 2014 reassessment of Disability Support Pensioners under stricter impairment tables and the introduction of Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme.

The symposium will conclude with a facilitated discussion focussed on how epidemiologists can come together internationally to grasp the opportunities and address the challenges in research focussed on the health of people with disabilities.

Names of presenters

Professor Anne Kavanagh, PhD

Dr Nicola Fortune, PhD

Dr George Disney, PhD

Dr Zoe Aitken

Dr Samia Badji, PhD

263Disability and inequality on the social determinants of health: data, data gaps, and policy implications

Focus of Presentation

People with disability experience inequality in relation to social determinants of health such as employment, education and housing. Under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Australia must collect data to assess fulfilment of its Convention obligations and to identify and address barriers faced by people with disability in exercising their rights. The objective of our research was to determine the extent to which such data are currently available.

Findings

With input from people with disability, we developed a monitoring framework and indicators to measure inequalities between Australians with and without disability in relation to social determinants of health. National data sources that included a disability identifier were available to report on 73% of the 128 indicators. For example, in the domain ‘Employment’, national data were available for indicators of labour force status, long-term unemployment, leave entitlements, and employment in high-skill jobs. Data were not available for the following indicators: under-employment, access to job design modifications, and disability-related discrimination in the workplace.

Conclusions/Implications

It is currently not possible to quantify inequalities between Australians with and without disability, track change over time, or identify factors that can inform effective policy responses for indicators where we lack national data that include a disability identifier.

Key messages

Addressing data gaps, including by facilitating disability identification in existing data collections, is essential for tackling disability-related inequalities on social determinants of health and meeting our obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Disability, Loneliness and Health in the UK: cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Research has suggested that exposure to loneliness can have a powerful detrimental impact on health, including mental health. Addressing socially determined health inequity requires understanding of the situation of marginalized or vulnerable groups. People with disability are increasingly being recognized as one such group. Little population-based research has addressed the association between loneliness and health among working age adults with and without disability.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of data collected in waves 8 and 9 of Understanding Society, the UK's main annual household panel study.

RESULTS

Rates of exposure to substantial loneliness were 25.4% (95%CI 23.5-27.3%) among adults with persistent disability (disability at W8 and W9), 15.4% (13.3-17.5%) among adults with disability onset (disability at W9 only), 12.3% (10.1-14.5%) among adults with disability offset (disability at W8 only), and 6.9% (6.5-7.3%) among adults with no disability. Exposure to loneliness was positively associated with the incidence (GHQ-12) and prevalence (SF-12 Mental) of mental health problems, but not the prevalence of physical health problems (SF-12 Physical). Disability status appeared to moderate the association between loneliness and health, with the difference between the persistent disability and no disability group increasing with exposure to greater levels of loneliness.

CONCLUSION

Loneliness may be an important determinant of the poorer mental health of working age adults with disability in the UK. Exposure rates are significantly higher than among the non-disabled population. The strength of association between exposure to loneliness and poorer mental health is greater for people with persistent disability than people with no disability.

The International Classification of Health Interventions: an 'epistemic hub' for use in public health

The current lack of a common basis for collecting data on population-level prevention and health promotion interventions causes public health to be relatively invisible within broader health systems, making it vulnerable to funding cuts when there is pressure to reduce spending. Further, the inconsistent use of terms for describing interventions hinders knowledge translation and building an evidence base for public health practice and policy. The International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI), being developed by the World Health Organization, is a standard statistical classification for interventions across the full scope of health systems. ICHI has potential to meet the need for a common language and structure for describing and capturing information about prevention and health promotion interventions. We report on a developmental appraisal conducted to examine the strengths and limitations of ICHI for coding interventions delivered for public health purposes. Our findings highlight classification challenges in relation to: consistently identifying separate components within multi-component interventions; operationalizing the ICHI concept of intervention target when there are intermediary targets as well as an ultimate target; coding an intervention component that involves more than one ICHI target or action; and standardising what is being counted. We propose that, alongside its purpose as a statistical classification, ICHI can play a valuable role as an 'epistemic hub', to be used flexibly by public health actors to meet a range of information needs, and as a basis for improved communication and exchange.

Building a statistical classification: A new tool for classification development and testing

Statistical classifications are essential for collecting consistent data that can be compared over space and time. However, a publicly-documented body of practice concerning how to undertake the development and testing of a statistical classification is currently lacking. What aspects of the classification should be tested during the development process? How do we judge whether the classification is fit-for-purpose? How should problems and shortcomings be identified so that they can be remedied? To fill this gap, we drew on existing, authoritative sources to develop an analytic structure for use in the development and testing of statistical classifications. It consists of two components: (1) a statistical classification development and testing framework reflecting the required features of a statistical classification; and (2) a 4-tier model representing the main elements that make up a statistical classification, to use as a heuristic structure within which to locate issues identified and consider how they can be addressed. In this paper, we outline the development of the framework and model, and reflect on their application in testing a draft classification of health interventions. We propose this analytic structure as a new tool to support those engaged in the development of statistical classifications.

Area-Level Associations between Built Environment Characteristics and Disability Prevalence in Australia: An Ecological Analysis

The importance of health-promoting neighborhoods has long been recognized, and characteristics of local built environments are among the social determinants of health. People with disability are more likely than other population groups to experience geographic mobility and cost restrictions, and to be reliant on 'opportunity structures' available locally. We conducted an ecological analysis to explore associations between area-level disability prevalence for people aged 15-64 years and area-level built environment characteristics in Australia's 21 largest cities. Overall, disability was more prevalent in areas with lower walkability and lower local availability of various neighborhood amenities such as public transport, healthier food options, public open space, physical activity and recreation destinations and health and mental health services. These patterns of lower liveability in areas of higher disability prevalence were observed in major cities but not in regional cities. Our findings suggest that geographically targeted interventions to improve access to health-enhancing neighborhood infrastructure could reduce disability-related inequalities in the social determinants of health.

Loneliness, social support, social isolation and wellbeing among working age adults with and without disability: Cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Loneliness is significantly related to health and wellbeing. However, there is little information on the prevalence of loneliness among people with disability or the association between disability, loneliness and wellbeing.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

For a nationally representative sample of adults (age 16-64) with/without disability, to examine exposure to three indicators of low social connectedness (loneliness, low perceived social support, social isolation), and to evaluate the association between low social connectedness and wellbeing. To test whether disability status moderated the relationship between low social connectedness and wellbeing.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of data from three annual rounds of the cross-sectional English Community Life Survey (CLS) 2016-19.

RESULTS

People with disability experienced loneliness, low perceived social support and social isolation at significantly higher rates than people without disability. Effect sizes were significantly greater for loneliness. Disability was associated with lower wellbeing. With one exception, low social connectedness was associated with lower wellbeing. Again, effect sizes were significantly greater for loneliness. The prevalence of loneliness was highest among adults with disability who were younger, economically inactive, living in rented or other accommodation, living alone and with low levels of access to environmental assets. There was no evidence that disability status moderated the association between exposure to low social connectedness and low wellbeing.

CONCLUSIONS

Loneliness was a particularly significant driver of poor wellbeing among people with disability. The relative independence between different indicators of social connectedness suggests that interventions to reduce loneliness will need to do more than simply increase rates of social contact or social support.

The Disability and Wellbeing Monitoring Framework: data, data gaps, and policy implications

OBJECTIVE

To develop a framework and indicators to monitor inequalities in health and the social determinants of health for Australians with disability.

METHODS

The development drew on existing frameworks and input from people with lived experience of disability.

RESULTS

The Disability and Wellbeing Monitoring Framework has 19 domains. Australian national data are available for 73% of the 128 indicators in these domains. Data gaps and limitations include the absence of national data and the absence of disability identifiers in some data sources.

CONCLUSIONS

The framework will be used to report baseline data for people with and without disability and to monitor inequalities over time in Australia. It will also be used to locate policy priorities and focus efforts to address data gaps. Implications for public health: Inequality between people with and without disability in relation to health and the social determinants of health is a public health issue that warrants greater attention than it has received to date. The framework provides a robust, evidence-informed tool to address the health inequalities of people with disability, inform the development of effective policy and practice responses, and monitor change over time.

The wellbeing of working-age adults with and without disability in the UK: Associations with age, gender, ethnicity, partnership status, educational attainment and employment status

BACKGROUND

Few population-based studies have examined the association between disability and personal wellbeing (PWB) among working-age adults.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

To determine: (1) the magnitude of differences in wellbeing between working-age adults with and without disability in contemporary samples representative of the UK population; and (2) whether the size of any observed differences between people with and without disability is moderated by age, gender, ethnicity, partnership status, educational attainment or employment status.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of data from three national cross-sectional surveys.

RESULTS

In each survey, people with disability scored lower than people without disability on all four indicators of PWB. Adjusting for the main effects of potentially moderating variables reduced the effect size of disability on PWB by an average of 24%. Subsequently adjusting for the two-way interaction terms between disability and potentially moderating variables reduced the effect size of disability (main effect) on PWB by an additional average of 73%. PWB among people with disability was significantly lower for: (1) men; (2) younger people; (3) those who belong to the majority ethnic group (white British); (4) those without a partner; and (5) people with lower socio-economic position.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that demographic characteristics and exposure to specific social determinants of poor health play a major role in the negative association between disability and personal wellbeing. A more sophisticated understanding of how social determinants interact to produce inequities associated with identities such as disability, gender, race, sexuality, and class (intersectionality) can inform effective policy interventions.

Use of a New International Classification of Health Interventions for Capturing Information on Health Interventions Relevant to People with Disabilities

Development of the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI) is currently underway. Once finalised, ICHI will provide a standard basis for collecting, aggregating, analysing, and comparing data on health interventions across all sectors of the health system. In this paper, we introduce the classification, describing its underlying tri-axial structure, organisation and content. We then discuss the potential value of ICHI for capturing information on met and unmet need for health interventions relevant to people with a disability, with a particular focus on interventions to support functioning and health promotion interventions. Early experiences of use of the Swedish National Classification of Social Care Interventions and Activities, which is based closely on ICHI, illustrate the value of a standard classification to support practice and collect statistical data. Testing of the ICHI beta version in a wide range of countries and contexts is now needed so that improvements can be made before it is finalised. Input from those with an interest in the health of people with disabilities and health promotion more broadly is welcomed.

Coding acute stroke care and telestroke with the International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI)

BACKGROUND

and purpose: Acute stroke care is to detect, diagnose, and treat patients in the shortest amount of time. Access to acute stroke care may however be limited in some areas and telemedicine has been thus used to increase its access. Coding acute stroke care as a health intervention had limited attention in the past.

METHODS

The International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI) currently under development was used to identify existing codes relevant for coding acute stroke care interventions, including telestroke. A review of the ICHI was conducted to identify codes relevant for acute stroke care by two independent reviewers.

RESULTS

A matching ICHI code was found for each of the steps in the acute stroke care process but no ICHI codes were available to specifically capture telestroke.

CONCLUSION

As telemedicine intervention is likely to become more common in the future, it will be imperative that the ICHI is able to code such interventions.

Embedding Nursing Interventions into the World Health Organization's International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI)

OBJECTIVE

The International Classification of Health Interventions, currently being developed, seeks to span all sectors of the health system. Our objective was to test the draft classification's coverage of interventions commonly delivered by nurses, and propose changes to improve the utility and reliability of the classification for aggregating and analyzing data on nursing interventions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 2-phase content mapping method was used: (1) three coders independently applied the classification to a dataset comprising 100 high-frequency nursing interventions; (2) the coders reached consensus for each intervention and identified reasons for initial discrepancies.

RESULTS

A consensus code was found for 80 of the 100 source terms; for 34% of these, the code was semantically equivalent to the source term, and for 64% it was broader. Issues that contributed to discrepancies in Phase 1 coding results included concepts in source terms not captured by the classification, ambiguities in source terms, and uncertainty of semantic matching between "action" concepts in source terms and classification codes.

DISCUSSION

While the classification generally provides good coverage of nursing interventions, there remain a number of content gaps and granularity issues. Further development of definitions and coding guidance is needed to ensure consistency of application.

CONCLUSION

This study has produced a set of proposals concerning changes needed to improve the classification. The novel method described here will inform future health terminology and classification content coverage studies.

In search of an integrative measure of functioning

International trends towards people-centred, integrative care and support require any measurement of functioning and disability to meet multiple aims. The information requirements of two major Australian programs for disability and rehabilitation are outlined, and the findings of two searches for suitable measures of functioning and disability are analysed. Over 30 current measures of functioning were evaluated in each search. Neither search found a generic measure of functioning suitable for these multibillion dollar programs, relevant to a wide range of people with a variety of health conditions and functioning experiences, and capable of indicating support needs, associated costs, progress and outcomes. This unsuccessful outcome has implications internationally for policy-relevant information for disability, rehabilitation and related programs. The paper outlines the features of an Integrative Measure of Functioning (IMF) based on the concepts of functioning and environmental factors in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). An IMF would be applicable across a variety of health conditions, settings and purposes, ranging from individual assessment to public health. An IMF could deliver person-centred, policy-relevant information for a range of programs, promoting harmonised language and measurement and supporting international trends in human services and public health.