title: Prevalence of childhood disability and the characteristics and circumstances of disabled children in the UK: secondary analysis of the Family Resources Survey.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Robust data on the prevalence of childhood disability and the circumstances and characteristics of disabled children is crucial to understanding the relationship between impairment and social disadvantage. It is also crucial for public policy development aimed at reducing the prevalence of childhood disability and providing appropriate and timely service provision. This paper reports prevalence rates for childhood disability in the United Kingdom (UK) and describes the social and household circumstances of disabled children, comparing these where appropriate to those of non-disabled children.
  
  
  METHODS
  Data were generated from secondary analysis of the Family Resources Survey, a national UK cross-sectional survey, (2004/5) which had data on 16,012 children aged 0-18 years. Children were defined as disabled if they met the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) definition (1995 and 2005). Frequency distributions and cross-tabulations were run to establish prevalence estimates, and describe the circumstances of disabled children. To establish the association between individual social and material factors and childhood disability when other factors were controlled for, logistic regression models were fitted on the dependent variable 'DDA defined disability'.
  
  
  RESULTS
  7.3% (CI 6.9, 7.7) of UK children were reported by as disabled according to the DDA definition. Patterns of disability differed between sexes with boys having a higher rate overall and more likely than girls to experience difficulties with physical coordination; memory, concentration and learning; communication. Disabled children lived in different personal situations from their non-disabled counterparts, and were more likely to live with low-income, deprivation, debt and poor housing. This was particularly the case for disabled children from black/minority ethnic/mixed parentage groups and lone-parent households. Childhood disability was associated with lone parenthood and parental disability and these associations persisted when social disadvantage was controlled for.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  These analyses suggest that UK disabled children experience higher levels of poverty and personal and social disadvantage than other children. Further research is required to establish accurate prevalence estimates of childhood disability among different black and minority ethnic groups and to understand the associations between childhood disability and lone parenthood and the higher rates of sibling and parental disability in households with disabled children.
authors.affiliation: School of Health and Social Studies, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK. c.m.blackburn@warwick.ac.uk
authors.forename: Clare M
authors.initials: CM
authors.lastname: Blackburn
authors.forename: Nick J
authors.initials: NJ
authors.lastname: Spencer
authors.forename: Janet M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Read
mesh_terms: D001288:Attention; D002648:Child; D003142:Communication; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D003466:Cultural Characteristics; D002658:Developmental Disabilities / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000209:etiology* / Q000523:psychology; D019988:Children with Disabilities / Q000523:psychology / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005190:Family / Q000523:psychology; D005260:Female; D006798:Housing; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning; D016015:Logistic Models; D008297:Male; D008568:Memory; D011203:Poverty / Q000523:psychology; D015995:Prevalence; D011610:Psychosocial Deprivation; D012307:Risk Factors; D012737:Sex Factors; D012931:Social Environment; D006113:United Kingdom / Q000453:epidemiology
references.citation: JAMA. 2007 Jun 27;297(24):2741-51
references.pmid: 17595275
references.citation: Am J Ment Retard. 2007 Jul;112(4):261-74
references.pmid: 17559293
references.citation: Eur J Public Health. 2006 Aug;16(4):354-60
references.pmid: 16207724
references.citation: Child Care Health Dev. 2010 Jan;36(1):130-41
references.pmid: 19735266
references.citation: Child Care Health Dev. 2007 May;33(3):291-5
references.pmid: 17439443