Socioeconomic Inequalities in Social Protection Among People with Disabilities in Ecuador: A Cross-Sectional Study
Résumé fourni par la source
In 2007, Ecuador ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities and introduced a national social programme to improve access and quality of life for people with disabilities. This study assessed disability prevalence and socioeconomic inequalities in three social protection outcomes: household visits, benefits received during visits, and official disability accreditation. A cross-sectional study analysed data from the 2014 national population-based survey, which showed a 3.84% disability prevalence. Overall, 37% of respondents reported at least one household visit among them, 77% received a benefit and 60% had official accreditation. Marked socioeconomic disparities expressed in absolute differences were observed. Visits were less frequent among individuals without formal education (AD: −30.41; 95% CI: −37.15, −14.09) and those in the poorest households (AD: −17.74; 95% CI: −23.01, −12.48). Participants with primary education were less likely to receive benefits (AD: −19.51; 95% CI: −32.83, −6.19), while Afro-Ecuadorian (AD: 20.07; 95% CI: 4.20, 35.95) and Indigenous individuals (AD: 19.61; 95% CI: 6.99, 32.24) were more likely to receive them. Conversely, those with basic education (AD: 21.38; 95% CI: 13.53, 29.23) were more often accredited than those with higher education. Although the programme has reached many individuals, access remains unequal.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Socioeconomic Inequalities in Social Protection Among People with Disabilities in Ecuador: A Cross-Sectional Study
- Date Crossref
- 14/04/2026
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.