Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 Jul 19;18(7):e0288763. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288763

The burden of disabilities in Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia: A cross-sectional, descriptive study

Zelalem Tenaw 1,*, Taye Gari 2, Achamyelesh Gebretsadik 2
Editor: Chung-Ying Lin3
PMCID: PMC10355417  PMID: 37467216

Abstract

Background

Assessing the burden and describing the status of people with disabilities is very essential. The previous studies conducted about the prevalence, causes, and types of disability in Ethiopia were inconsistent and disagreeable.

Objectives

To determine the prevalence, causes, and types of disabilities in Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia.

Methods

A house-to-house census was carried out on a total of 39,842 households in 30 randomly selected kebeles of the Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration, Sidama National Regional State. The data were collected using structured and pretested questionnaires via the Kobo Collect application from May 01 to 30, 2022. The analysis was performed by STATA version 16 software. After cleaning and organizing, descriptive statistics were employed to characterize the study findings.

Results

In this study, people with disabilities aged one to 80 years old were included. The mean Standard Deviation (SD) age of people with disabilities in years was 31.95 (15.33). Of 228,814 people, 1,694 were people with disabilities in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration, with a prevalence of 0.74% (95% CI: 0.72, 0.76). Of the causes of disability, 61% of the disabilities were due to illness, injury, and accidents. Extremity paralysis (35.4%), vision disability (20.13%), hearing disability (19.7%), walking disability (14.7%), and cognitive disabilities (7.7%) were the identified types of disabilities.

Conclusion

This study revealed that the burden of disability is considerable in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration. The vast majority of disability causes could have been avoidable. As a result, developing and implementing various strategies to raise community awareness about the causes and preventive measures is critical.

Introduction

Although the definition of disability varies from country to country [1,2], we considered people with disability as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as; any impairment of a person’s body function or structure or mental functioning, activity limitation, and participation restriction (environmental factors) [3]. Globally, 15% of the world population lives with disabilities, of which 75%-80% are from developing countries [4,5]. Although the majority of people with disabilities are from developing countries, their prevalence varies among and within countries. The prevalence of people with disabilities were varied across developing countries, which is supported by the findings in Bangladesh (10.5%) [6], in Kenya (2.2%) [7], in South Africa (9.7%) [8], and in Ethiopia, 1.8% [9] to 4.9% [10]. According to the Ethiopian population and housing census conducted in 2007, the prevalence of disabilities was 1.2% [11] at the national level and 0.85% in Sidama National Regional State. However, the WHO estimates that 17.6% of Ethiopian people are living with disabilities [4].

The causes of disability are multifactorial. Of the causes of disability, 37% are due to illness [12] and 17.8% to 35.9% are due to injury [9,10,12], and infections like meningitis, measles, maternal rubella, and poliomyelitis [10,12] were some of the causes of disability. On the other hand, different studies revealed different types of disabilities in Ethiopia, including 34% to 51% vision disability [9,10,12], 11.7% to 22.3% walking disability [9,10,12], 6.8% to 22.3% hearing disability [9,10,12] and 15% cognitive disability [9,12].

The prevalence of disabilities in Ethiopia is very inconsistent, ranging from 1.8% [9] to 4.9% [10]. The prevalence of 1.2% from the Ethiopian population and housing census prevalence was very late (conducted 15 years back) [11]. There is also a significant disparity between World Health Organization estimates of disabled people and the actual number of disabled people. Likewise, there is a disagreement between the findings regarding the causes and types of disability in Ethiopia, evidenced by a 17.8% to 35.9% [9,10,12] difference in the magnitude of disability due to injury and a 34% to 51% [9,10,12] difference in the types of vision disability.

Therefore, determining the prevalence of people with disabilities and identifying the causes and types of disabilities is very important for policymakers, program planners, and researchers to fill the knowledge gap and design different strategies to reach people with disabilities based on the magnitude, causes and types of disabilities in Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia.

Methods and materials

Study design and setting

A house-to-house census was conducted from May 01 to 30, 2022 to determine the prevalence, causes, and types of disabilities in Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia. The research was carried out in the Dale and Wonsho districts, as well as the Yirgalem city administration. According to the Sidama National Regional State Report (2021/2022), the total population of Dale district was 254,653; that of Wonsho district was 129,730, and Yirgalem city administration was 85,072 [13,14] with an estimated 53,768 households (HHs) in Dale district, 21,857 households in Wonsho district, and 42,902 households in Yirgalem city administration. The two districts are the Health and Demographic Surveillance sites of Hawassa University. Both districts are known for their coffee production and highly dense populations and are considered representative of the region’s population of their socio-economic and cultural issues. Dale district has 36 rural and two urban kebeles (lower political administrative units in Ethiopia), while Wonsho district has 17 rural and two urban kebeles, and Yirgalem city administration has three rural and six urban kebeles.

Estimated sample size (households)

The estimated households for the census were 39,420.

Sampling technique and procedure

The study was conducted in randomly selected urban and rural kebeles in the Dale and Wonsho districts and the Yirgalem city administration. There are 56 rural and 10 urban kebeles in Dale, Wonsho districts, and Yirgalem city administration. Of these kebeles, 30 kebeles (20 rural and 10 urban) were selected randomly. A multi-stage stratified random sampling technique was used. The stratification was based on residency (rural and urban).

Data collection procedure

Six experienced BSc Nurses who are fluent in the Sidamu Afoo language collected data and were supervised by one experienced supervisor (MSc holder). The data collectors visited the selected kebeles and created community awareness about the purpose of the census by collaborating with the kebele’s health extension worker and the manager of the kebele and assembling the community in the kebele’s venue before starting the census data collection. The assembling was done to minimize the informational bias of the head or leader of the household. Then, a house-to-house census among the eligible and selected kebeles was conducted to identify people with disabilities. The heads of the households were asked about the presence of a person who has a problem with seeing, hearing, speaking, and/or standing, walking, or sitting, body part movement, the functioning of hands and legs, or mental retardation or mental problems among the family members that confirmed by medical staffs. When there were people with disabilities in the household, other important variables, including sociodemographic characteristics, types of disability, and causes of disability, were asked. The data collection tool (questionnaire) was adopted from the 2007 Ethiopian Central Statistical Agency (CSA) population and housing census [11]. We obtained permission to download and use the survey data on September 27, 2021.The data collection tool was prepared in English and then translated into the Sidamu Afoo language and translated back to English to check and retain its originality and consistency. The questionnaire was pretested in two (one urban and one rural) kebeles in the Hawassa city administration.

Data analysis

The data were collected using the Kobo collect application and imported into Stata version 16 for analysis using the "SSC install kobo2stata" command. The details of the data analysis were described elsewhere [15]. To describe the characteristics of people with disabilities, we employed descriptive statistics like percentage and mean with standard deviation. The prevalence was calculated by considering the 2021–2022 latest Kebeles population report as a denominator because, because of resource limitations, we could not enumerate the total number of people in the households.

Ethical considerations

The ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Review Board at the College of Medicine and Health Sciences of Hawassa University with an approval number of ref. no. IRB/143/14. After approval, a support letter was written to the Sidama National Regional Public Health Institute. Then, after obtaining the support letter from Sidama National Regional Public Health Institute, the permission and cooperation letter were given to the woreda health offices. Finally, the woreda health offices wrote a permission letter to selected kebeles, asking them to cooperate and give consent to conduct the study. Verbal consent was gained from the head of household. There was a yes or no question in the tool and the data collectors tick whether the study participants are volunteer or not with the presence of kebele (smallest administrative area) leader to collect the data. There is no risk in participating in this survey. People with disabilities having different health problems were linked to nearby health facilities for possible support and follow-up. The participants were recruited from May 01 to 30, 2022.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics of people with disabilities

A total of 39,842 households with a total population of 228,814 were included in this study from 30 rural and urban kebeles. Of these populations, a total of 1694 people with disabilities were identified and included in this study. The mean (SD) age of people with disabilities was 31.95 (15.33) years. Among people with disabilities, 999 (58.97%) were male and 1114 (65.57%) resided in rural settings. Of the study participants, 1044 (61.63%) were not able to read and write (Table 1).

Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of people with disabilities in Sidama Regional Stata, Ethiopia, 2022.

Variable Number Percent
Age in years Mean (SD) 31.95 (15.33)
Sex Female 695 41.03
Male 999 58.97
Marital status Never married 1017 60.04
Married 622 36.72
Widowed 46 2.72
Divorced 9 0.53
Residence Rural 1114 65.57
Urban 580 34.24
Employment Employed 35 2.63
Not employed 1659 97.93
Educational status Unable to read and write 1044 61.63
Primary education 398 23.5
Secondary education 233 13.75
College/University 19 1.43
Disabilities association member Yes 409 24.2
No 1281 75.8

Prevalence of people with disabilities

A total of 39,842 households with a total population of 228,814 were included in this study. Of these populations, 1,694 were people with disabilities, which corresponds to an overall prevalence rate of 0.74% (95% CI: 0.72, 0.76). Of the total households, 4.3% (95% CI: 4%, 4.5%) reported at least one member with a disability.

Reported causes of disabilities

As listed in Fig 1, different causes were mentioned by people with disabilities or other concerned bodies as causes of disability in the Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration. The most common causes are inborn 614 (36%) and illness 598 (35%) (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Causes of disability in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administraton, Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia, 2022.

Fig 1

Types of disabilities

Of 1694 people with disabilities, more than one-third (35.4%) had severe paralysis/handicap disability, followed by vision disability 341(20.1%). Among the people with disabilities, 41(2.4%) had more than one type of disability (Fig 2).

Fig 2. Types of disability in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration, Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia, 2022.

Fig 2

Types of disability by age

Regardless of gender, all types of disabilities were more prevalent among people in the productive age group (16 to55 years old) (Table 2).

Table 2. Types of disability by age in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration, Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia, 2022.

Types of disability (n = 1694) Age 1 to 5 years Age 6 to
15 years
Age 16 to
25 years
Age 26 to
35 years
Age 36 to
45 years
Age 46 to
55 years
Age 56 to
65 years
Age 66 to
80 years
Extremity (n = 599) 3(0.16%) 35(2.07%) 133(7.85%) 179(10.57%) 122(7.20%) 79(4.66%) 33(1.95%) 15(0.89%)
Vision
(n = 341)
4(0.24%) 17(1.00%) 76(4.49%) 56(3.31%) 61(3.60%) 64(3.79%) 35(2.07%) 28(1.65%)
Hearing
(n = 334)
3(0.16%) 44(2.60%) 106(6.26%) 68(4.01%) 47(2.77%) 39(2.30%) 11(0.65%) 16(0.94%)
Walking (n = 249) 6(0.35%) 17(1.00%) 61(3.60%) 86(5.08%) 40(2.36%) 29(1.79%) 7(0.41%) 3(0.16%)
Mental
(n = 130)
0(0%) 13(0.89%) 45(2.66%) 42(2.48%) 19(1.12%) 5(0.30%) 2(0.12%) 4(0.24%)
Multiple
(n = 41)
3(0.18%) 1(0.06%) 10(0.59%) 10(0.59%) 12(0.71%) 3(0.18%) 1(0.06%) 1(0.06%)
Total 19(1.1%) 127(7.5%) 431(25.4%) 441(26.0%) 301(17.8%) 219(12.9%) 89(5.3%) 67(4.0%)

Causes of disability by age

For both genders, all causes of disabilities were prevalent among people in the productive age group (16 to55 years old) (Table 3).

Table 3. Causes of disability by age in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration, Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia, 2022.

Causes of disability Age 1 to 5 years Age 6 to 15 years Age 16 to 25 years Age 26 to 35 years Age 36 to 45 years Age 46 to 55 years Age 56 to 65 years Age 66 to 80 years
Inborn (n = 614) 8(0.47%) 71(4.19%) 177(10.45%) 148(8.74%) 100(5.90%) 76(4.49%) 19(1.12%) 15(0.89%)
Illness (n = 598) 2(0.12%) 27(1.59%) 131(7.73%) 140(8.26%) 111(6.55%) 94(5.55%) 52(3.07%) 41(2.42%)
Injury (n = 324) 6(0.35%) 7(0.41%) 89(5.25%) 113(6.67%) 60(3.54%) 33(1.95%) 10(0.59%) 6(0.35%)
Accident (n = 107) 0(0%) 13(0.77%) 20(1.18%) 23(1.36%) 24(1.42%) 16(0.94%) 7(0.41%) 4(0.24%)
Polio (n = 51) 3(0.18%) 9(0.53%) 14(0.83%) 17(1.00%) 6(0.35%) 0(0%) 1(0.06%) 1(0.06%)
Total 19(1.12%) 127(7.2%) 431(34%) 441(27.3%) 301(16%) 219(9.2%) 89(3%) 67(1.4%)

Discussion

The prevalence of people with disabilities in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration, Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia was 0.74%. Inborn, illness, injury, accidents and polio are the identified causes of disability. Extremity paralysis, vision disability, hearing disability, walking disability, and cognitive disabilities were the types of disabilities in the region.

This study’s prevalence is lower than studies conducted in Bangladesh (10.5%) [6], South Africa (9.7%) [8] and Kenya (2.2%) [7]. The possible reasons might be that all three studies were excluded under five cases, especially the Bangladesh study, which was considered to have participants over 18 years of age which means disability is prevalent [10] and also the study period (2010 vs 2022) and sample size might be the other possible reasons. As the number of denominators increases, the prevalence will be decreased. The prevalence observed in this study is lower than that reported in studies done in Dabat districts, Ethiopia (4.9% [10], 3.8% [16], and the Dabat health demographic monitoring site (2.14% [12] and 1.8% [9]), which were all conducted in Ethiopia. The discrepancy may be due to the study year 2001, which was the time when the maximum prevalence of 4.9% was reported. The sample size may also be the cause of the discrepancy, as the second maximum prevalence of 3.8% was found in a population of 24,453 people, which is much smaller than the population of this study (228,814). The other possible justification might be the fact that most of the wars in Ethiopia happened in the northern part of the country rather than the southern part of Ethiopia [17]. This might increase the prevalence of disability. In general, when we compare the prevalence of disability with study periods, the prevalence of disability decreased over time, which might be because of the improvements in the medical care system like outreach and static cataract surgery, vaccination, and socio-economic factors [18,19]. The other reason can be best explained by the improvement of the medical health care system in terms of access and service diversification and urgent treatment of disability-causing problems [20].

In this study, the most frequently identified causes of disability in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administrations, Sidama National Regional Stata, Ethiopia are; Inborn/unknown 36%, illness 35%, injury 19%, accidents 7% and polio 3%. This evidence is in line with the study conducted in the Dabat district in Northern Ethiopia, with illness at 37% and injury at 17.8% to 35.9% [9,12]. In this study, 61% of the disabilities are due to illness, injury, and accidents, which are preventable. As evidenced by different findings [12,21] the majority of the disabilities in Africa are due to the above three preventable causes. In low and middle-income countries, including Ethiopia, the majority of the disabilities are caused by different infections like meningitis, measles, maternal rubella and poliomyelitis [10,22] which are avoidable and preventable by early detection and treatment [12]. But due to poor health-seeking behaviour and access, many people are the victims of disabilities in low and middle-income countries, including Ethiopia. By encouraging preconception care and antenatal follow-up, we can also minimize or prevent inborn causes of disability, which is one of the commonest 36% causes of disability, which may be important to prevent congenital anomalies that could cause disability [23,24].

Regarding types of disability, extremity paralysis (35.4%), vision disability (20.13%), hearing disability (19.7%), walking disability (14.7%), and cognitive disabilities (7.7%) were the identified types of disabilities, (2.4%) of people with disabilities had more than one type of disability. This finding is different from the studies conducted in the Dabat district, Ethiopia and North Ethiopia [9,10,12]. In the Dabat study, the leading causes were 51% vision disability, 22.3% walking disability, and 22.3% hearing disability [12]. The other study from the Dabat health demographic surveillance site identified vision disability (39%), hearing disability (18%), walking disability (17%), and cognitive disability (15%) as the leading types of disability [9]. Another study from Dabat district, North Ethiopia, revealed walking disability, vision disability, and extremity paralysis/handicap were the common types of disability [10]. The Nigerian study, like the Ethiopian studies, discovered that 37% had vision disabilities, 30% had mobility disabilities, 15% had hearing disabilities, and 9% had mental disabilities [22], which could be due to differences in healthcare-seeking practices for specific disabilities caused by relating with different cultural thoughts. In the Dabat district study [12], 8% of people with disabilities had more than one disability. This prevalence is higher than ours and may be due to the sample size difference (denominator) of 71,673 in Dabat and 228,814 in this study.

People with disabilities have the right to access and attend education, and various strategies such as inclusive education have been designed and implemented in low and middle-income countries such as Ethiopia [25,26]. In Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration, Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia, 1044 (61.6%) cannot write and read. Only 650 (38.4%) attended formal education, with a mean (SD) grade completed. In the region, 398 (23.5%) attended primary and 233 (13.75%) secondary schools. The most important issue here is that only 19 (1.43%) of people with disabilities had completed college or university. According to the evidence, access to and continuation of higher-grade education for formal education attendants is limited in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administrations. This evidence is supported by the study conducted in the Dabat district, North Ethiopia [12]. The reasons might be a negative attitude toward people with disabilities, a lack of educational supportive materials (braille books and papers), and a lack of skills and training for teachers [26]. Of the formal education attendants, 25.1% were male, 13.3% were female, and 20.9% resided in rural settings. Exclusion from education affects the employment status of people with disabilities [22]. In this study, only 35 (2.63%) people with disabilities were employed. It indicates they cannot generate income and are economically dependent since employment is one of the sources of income [22].

The other important finding of this study is assessing the status of disabilities association and membership of the association. Of the 1694 people with disabilities, 409 (24.2%) were disabilities association members. Thirteen percent of the members were urban residents, and of these, 6.5% were males, and 11.2% were from rural settings, of which 7.14% were males. This finding indicates that a majority (75.8%) of people with disabilities were excluded from different services that came through disabilities associations, and the associations in our setting considered all the people with disabilities included in the associations and considered only those who are members of disabilities associations. Disabilities associations play a pivotal role in evaluating and monitoring different services given and needed for people with disabilities [27].

This study is the first in Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia to characterize and investigate the burden of disability in the region, which could be used to fill the knowledge gap and may be important to program planners, policymakers, and researchers. To minimize information bias from the head of the household, awareness creation for the community about the importance of the census, involving kebele’s health extension workers and managers during the data collection, was done. The other strength of this study was considering the large sample size (household and population). However, due to the large sample size and resource limitations, we as researchers could not consider disability screening methods in the data collection (especially mental retardations and problems). The other limitation of this study was taking of denominator from the kebeles registration to determine the prevalence of people with disabilities, this might affect the prevalence of people with disabilities in the study districts and city administration.

Conclusions

This study revealed that the burden of disability is considerable in Dale and Wonsho districts and Yirgalem city administration, Sidama National Regional State, though the prevalence is lower than the previous studies conducted in Ethiopia. The majorities of the causes of disabilities were avoidable. Therefore, community awareness about the causes and preventive strategies is important.

Supporting information

S1 File

(PDF)

S2 File. Questionnaires (English version).

(DOCX)

S3 File. Questionnaires (Afo-sidamu).

(DOCX)

S1 Raw data

(DTA)

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the household leaders who participated in this study for their genuine responses about the presence of people with disabilities in the household. Lastly, we are also thankful to the Sidama National Regional State Health Department and selected woredas and kebeles for their help and permission to undertake the research.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.World Health Organization. The international classification of functioning disability and health: common language for functioning, disability, and health. Geneva; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.United Nations. Disability and Development Report New York: Department of economic and social affairs; 2018. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.World Health Organization. Definitions and indicators in family planning maternal & child health and reproductive health used in the WHO regional office for Europe. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Bickenbach Jerome. The World Report on Disability. The World Report on Disability. 2011;26(5):655–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Swaibu Zziwa, Harriet Babikako, Doris Kwesiga, Olive Kobusingye, Bentley Jacob A, Oporia Frederick, et al. Prevalence and factors associated with utilization of rehabilitation services among people with physical disabilities in Kampala, Uganda. A descriptive cross-sectional study. BMC public health. 2019;19(1):1–11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Marella M, Huq NL, Devine A, Baker SM, Quaiyum MA, Keeffe JE. Prevalence and correlates of disability in Bogra district of Bangladesh using the rapid assessment of disability survey. BMC public health. 2015;15. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2202-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Statistics Kenya. Status of disability in Kenya, statistics from the 2019 census. Kenya: Development initiatives; 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Amosun S, Jelsma J, Maart S. Disability prevalence-context matters: A descriptive community-based survey. African journal of disability. 2019;8(1):1–8. doi: 10.4102/ajod.v8i0.512 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Chala MB, Mekonnen S, Andargie G, Kebede Y, Yitayal M, Alemu K, et al. Prevalence of disability and associated factors in Dabat Health and Demographic Surveillance System site, northwest Ethiopia. BMC public health. 2017;17(1):1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Tamrat YK, Shitaye Alemu, John Moore, Girmaye,. The prevalence and characteristics of physical and sensory disabilities in Northern Ethiopia. journal of disability and rehabilitation. 2001;23(17):799–804. doi: 10.1080/09638280110066271 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Central Statistical Agency. Population and housing census of Ethiopia, 2007 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Central Statistical Agency; 2007. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Abebe S, Abera M, Nega A, Gizaw Z, Bayisa M, Fasika S, et al. Severe disability and its prevalence and causes in northwestern Ethiopia: evidence from Dabat district of Amhara National Regional State. A community based cross-sectional study. In: University of Gondar E, editor. 2021. p. 1–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Sidama Region Health Bureau. Health facility data with Catchment Population (Updated Meskerem 2014 E.C). Hawassa, Ethiopia: Sidama Region Health Bureau; 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Sidama Region Health Bureau. Health facility and population prifile. Hawassa, Ethiopia: Sidama Region Health Bureau; 2022. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tenaw Z, Gari T, Gebretsadik A. Contraceptive use among reproductive-age females with disabilities in central Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia: a multilevel analysis. PeerJ. 2023;11:e15354. doi: 10.7717/peerj.15354 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Fitaw Y, Boersma JM. Prevalence and impact of disability in north-western Ethiopia. Disability and rehabilitation. 2006;28(15):949–53. doi: 10.1080/09638280500404552 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Silkin T, Hendrie B. Research in the war zones of Eritrea and northern Ethiopia. Disasters. 1997;21(2):166–76. doi: 10.1111/1467-7717.212052 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Schoeni RF, Freedman VA, Martin LG. Why is late‐life disability declining? The Milbank Quarterly. 2008;86(1):47–89. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2007.00513.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Andre FE, Booy R, Bock HL, Clemens J, Datta SK, John TJ, et al. Vaccination greatly reduces disease, disability, death and inequity worldwide. Bulletin of the World health organization. 2008;86:140–6. doi: 10.2471/blt.07.040089 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Luengo-Fernandez R, Gray AM, Rothwell PM. Effect of urgent treatment for transient ischaemic attack and minor stroke on disability and hospital costs (EXPRESS study): a prospective population-based sequential comparison. The Lancet Neurology. 2009;8(3):235–43. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70019-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Gona JK, Newton CR, Rimba K, Mapenzi R, Kihara M, Van de Vijver FJ, et al. Parents’ and professionals’ perceptions on causes and treatment options for autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in a multicultural context on the Kenyan coast. PloS one. 2015;10(8):e0132729. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132729 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Smith N. The face of disability in Nigeria: a disability survey in Kogi and Niger States. Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development. 2011;22(1):35–47. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Lassi ZS, Kedzior SG, Tariq W, Jadoon Y, Das JK, Bhutta ZA. Effects of preconception care and periconception interventions on maternal nutritional status and birth outcomes in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Nutrients. 2020;12(3). doi: 10.3390/nu12030606 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Lassi ZS, Imam AM, Dean SV, Bhutta ZA. Preconception care: caffeine, smoking, alcohol, drugs and other environmental chemical/radiation exposure. Reproductive health. 2014;11(3):1–12. doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-11-S3-S6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Disabilities Inclusive Education Systems and Policies Guide for Low-and Middle-Income Countries. Occasional Paper. RTI Press Publication OP-0043-1707 [press release]. ResearchTriangle Park, NC: rti.org2017. [PubMed]
  • 26.Franck B, Joshi DK. Including students with disabilities in education for all: Lessons from Ethiopia. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2017;21(4):347–60. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Enns H. The role of organizations of disabled people. A Disabled Peoples’ International Discussion Paper, Sweden, Independent Living Institute. 2008. [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Chung-Ying Lin

23 Jun 2023

PONE-D-22-33207The Burden of Disabilities in Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional, Descriptive StudyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Tenaw,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 07 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Chung-Ying Lin

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

2. In the ethics statement in the Methods, you have specified that verbal consent was obtained. Please provide additional details regarding how this consent was documented and witnessed, and state whether this was approved by the IRB.

3. Please include a separate caption for each figure in your manuscript.

4. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The aticle titled “The Burden of Disabilities in Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional, Descriptive Study” has been reviewed. Overall, this is an interesting study while the data will be benefeicial for the policy maker as it use a large sample size. However, there are some issues need to be clarified as follows:

1.In the background, the authors stated the prevalence of disabilities were varied across the countries. It may sound normally as the various character found in each country may resulted in different prevalence. Then, why did the author stated this reason to identify the significance of study? As this is an original study (not the meta-analysis), the results may showed a prevalence that may be different from others again. The gap analysis should be more clear and described in this section.

2.How was the calculation of sample size? What is the reference used to calculate it? Is it based on the previous study or using some statistical analysis such as G power analysis.

3.In the data collection procedure, the authors mentioned “…gathering the community in the kebele’s venue”. What does it mean here? What was the purpose of this procedure?

4.The table 1, the authors provide the data of “widowed” and “divorced”. It may overestimates as widowed may be one type of divorced. Please use more clear and sharp terminology. In addition, the same case with the term “non-government” and “private”. These may cause bias. The

5.Table 2, why did the authors categorize the prevalence of disability into several age category? Is there any reference showing the significance different among those categories? In addition, if so, please add it on the research aim.

6.In the discussion section, the authors described that the exclusion of under-five years participants may cause the difference finding. Please add the reference why the under-five years participants may contribute to the difference. Is there any study supported?

7.In the discussion section, paragraph 6, “The other important finding of this study is assessing the status of disability associations and membership of disabilities”. What does the meaning of disability association? Why is it important?

8.Please do a proof read to ensure each sentence provide clear and sharp meaning.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Iqbal Pramukti, Ph.D.

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Comments for PLOS One_The Burden of Disabilities in Sidama National Regional State Ethiopia.docx

PLoS One. 2023 Jul 19;18(7):e0288763. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288763.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


30 Jun 2023

Date: 30/06/2023

Response letter

Dear editors

We would like to thank the reviewers and the editor for their invaluable comments, suggestions and their time.

We addressed all the issues raised by the reviewers and editor using their questions and responses, using blue for each comment and question one by one.

We believe the manuscript has been modified based on the given comments and is suitable for publication in PLOS ONE journal.

Zelalem Tenaw (Assistant Professor of Maternity and Rh)

On behalf of all authors

Editor’s comments (additional requirements) and responses

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

Response: Dear editor, thank you very much. The manuscript meets PLOS ONE’s style.

2. In the ethics statement in the Methods, you have specified that verbal consent was obtained. Please provide additional details regarding how this consent was documented and witnessed, and state whether this was approved by the IRB.

Response: The study was approved by the Hawassa University IRB. Then the head of the household asked his or her voluntariness; if volunteer, we tick “yes” and continue; if not volunteer, we tick “no” and leave the household. This was witnessed in the presence of the kebele leader (lines 149-151).

3. Please include a separate caption for each figure in your manuscript.

Response: Thank you for the comment. We included a separate caption for both figures.

4. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly.

Response: Thank you again for the comment. We included a caption for both the supporting information.

5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Response: Thank you for the comments. We reviewed our references and ensured they are complete and correct. And also, we have not cited retracted papers.

Reviewer 1 comments and responses

1. In the background, the authors stated the prevalence of disabilities were varied across the countries. It may sound normally as the various character found in each country may resulted in different prevalence. Then, why did the author stated this reason to identify the significance of study? As this is an original study (not the meta-analysis), the results may show a prevalence that may be different from others again. The gap analysis should be clearer and more described in this section.

Response: Dear reviewer, thank you for the very constructive comment. We modified the ambiguous statement (see lines 60-62). Otherwise, the gap is clearly showed (see lines 74-81).

2. How was the calculation of sample size? What is the reference used to calculate it? Is it based on the previous study or using some statistical analysis such as G power analysis.

Response: Thank you again for your comment. We selected 30 kebeles from 66 kebeles based on the estimated number of people with disabilities that we used for the other components of this projects, like (1). After randomly selecting the kebeles, we totally censused all the households present in the selected 30 kebeles (20 rural and 10 urban).

3. In the data collection procedure, the authors mentioned “…gathering the community in the kebele’s venue”. What does it mean here? What was the purpose of this procedure?

Response: Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your observation and comment. We modified the terminology gathering to assembling (see line 114). The purpose of the assembling was done to minimize the informational bias of the head or leader of the household (see lines 115-116).

4. The table 1, the authors provide the data of “widowed” and “divorced”. It may overestimate as widowed may be one type of divorced. Please use more clear and sharp terminology. In addition, the same case with the term “non-government” and “private”. These may cause bias.

Response: Thank you again. In our context, widowed has totally different meaning from divorced. Therefore, we believe that it is better to maintain the category as it is. Regarding types of employers, we removed it to minimize confusion.

5. Table 2, why did the authors categorize the prevalence of disability into several age category? Is there any reference showing the significance different among those categories? In addition, if so, please add it on the research aim.

Response: Thank you for your comment and concern. We believed that, since the study is descriptive, showing the burden of disability by age category had many importance for different stockholders to design appropriate strategies based on the age categories and it provides additional information

6. In the discussion section, the authors described that the exclusion of under-five years participants may cause the difference finding. Please add the reference because the under-five years participants may contribute to the difference. Is there any study supported?

Response: Thank you for your observation and comment. The evidence is supported with reference number 10. The justification is that, when the under-five included in the denominator, the prevalence decreased and prevalence roses with age (2).

7. In the discussion section, paragraph 6, “The other important finding of this study is assessing the status of disability associations and membership of disabilities”. What does the meaning of disability association? Why is it important?

Response: Dear reviewer, Thank you again for your comment. Disabilities associations are one of the important associations to reach and support people with disabilities. That is why assessing disabilities association membership is important.

8. Please do a proof read to ensure each sentence provide clear and sharp meaning.

Response: Thank you very much your comment. We did a proof reading to improve the language problems of the manuscript.

1. Tenaw Z, Gari T, Gebretsadik A. Contraceptive use among reproductive-age females with disabilities in central Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia: a multilevel analysis. PeerJ. 2023;11:e15354.

2. Tamrat YK, Shitaye Alemu, John Moore, Girmaye,. The prevalence and characteristics of physical and sensory disabilities in Northern Ethiopia. journal of disability and rehabilitation. 2001;23(17):799-804.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Rebuttal Letter .docx

Decision Letter 1

Chung-Ying Lin

5 Jul 2023

The Burden of Disabilities in Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional, Descriptive Study

PONE-D-22-33207R1

Dear Dr. Tenaw,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Chung-Ying Lin

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

The authors have made good responses and justifications to the reviewer's comments. I am satisfied with the revised manuscript. 

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Chung-Ying Lin

11 Jul 2023

PONE-D-22-33207R1

The Burden of Disabilities in Sidama National Regional State, Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional, Descriptive Study

Dear Dr. Tenaw:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Chung-Ying Lin

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File

    (PDF)

    S2 File. Questionnaires (English version).

    (DOCX)

    S3 File. Questionnaires (Afo-sidamu).

    (DOCX)

    S1 Raw data

    (DTA)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Comments for PLOS One_The Burden of Disabilities in Sidama National Regional State Ethiopia.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Rebuttal Letter .docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES