This paper aims to describe the contextual factors that gave rise to evidence-based medicine (EBM), as well as its controversies and limitations in the current health context. Our analysis utilizes two frameworks: (1) a complex adaptive view of health that sees both health and healthcare as non-linear phenomena emerging from their different components; and (2) the unified approach to the philosophy of science that provides a new background for understanding the differences between the phases of discovery, corroboration, and implementation in science. The need for standardization, the development of clinical epidemiology, concerns about the economic sustainability of health systems and increasing numbers of clinical trials, together with the increase in the computer’s ability to handle large amounts of data, have paved the way for the development of the EBM movement. It was quickly adopted on the basis of authoritative knowledge rather than evidence of its own capacity to improve the efficiency and equity of health systems. The main problem with the EBM approach is the restricted and simplistic approach to scientific knowledge, which prioritizes internal validity as the major quality of the studies to be included in clinical guidelines. As a corollary, the preferred method for generating evidence is the explanatory randomized controlled trial. This method can be useful in the phase of discovery but is inadequate in the field of implementation, which needs to incorporate additional information including expert knowledge, patients’ values and the context. EBM needs to move forward and perceive health and healthcare as a complex interaction, i.e. an interconnected, non-linear phenomenon that may be better analysed using a variety of complexity science techniques.

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.

Purpose: To examine the relevance of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) to CBR monitoring and evaluation by investigating the relationship between the ICF and information in published CBR monitoring and evaluation reports. Method: A three-stage literature search and analysis method was employed. Studies were identified via online database searches for peer-reviewed journal articles, and hand-searching of CBR network resources, NGO websites and specific journals. From each study “information items” were extracted; extraction consistency among authors was established. Finally, the resulting information items were coded to ICF domains and categories, with consensus on coding being achieved. Results: Thirty-six articles relating to monitoring and evaluating CBR were selected for analysis. Approximately one third of the 2495 information items identified in these articles (788 or 32%) related to concepts of functioning, disability and environment, and could be coded to the ICF. These information items were spread across the entire ICF classification with a concentration on Activities and Participation (49% of the 788 information items) and Environmental Factors (42%). Conclusions: The ICF is a relevant and potentially useful framework and classification, providing building blocks for the systematic recording of information pertaining to functioning and disability, for CBR monitoring and evaluation.

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.

Purpose: This paper describes a three-year research project leading to the development of the CBR Monitoring Manual and Menu (MM&M). The MM&M is a practical toolkit that meets the needs of CBR managers and stakeholders, and is consistent with the philosophy of CBR and community-based disability-inclusive development. It is designed to produce meaningful and locally useful information and data, based on international data standards where possible, to enable aggregation at regional, national and international levels. Methods: Five complementary workstreams of research were carried out from 2011 to 2014: 1) literature review and analysis; 2) participatory action research with CBR stakeholders; 3) analysis and refinement of validity of concepts and structures; 4) consultation and review; and 5) synthesis of results. This article documents the method and key results of each of the five workstreams, and the lessons learned along the way. Results: The MM&M is now freely available on-line at http://sydney.edu.au/health-sciences/cdrp/projects/cbr-monitoring.shtml. Collaboration among members of the development team continues, chiefly via an on-line group to which new members have been welcomed. Conclusion and Implications: At the time of writing, the MM&M is the only international monitoring product, known to the authors, that consciously sets out to reflect both a ‘bottom- up’ and ‘top-down’ perspective of monitoring information and data. To achieve this for a complex programme such as CBR, and to align with its principles, it was essential to use a multi-component and multi-stage strategy for tool development, involving a diverse multidisciplinary team includingcollaboration with CBR stakeholders.

High rates of unemployment among people with disability are long-standing and persistent problems worldwide. For public policy, estimates of prevalence and population profiles are required for designing support schemes such as Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme; for monitoring implementation of the United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities; and for monitoring service access, participation, and equity for people with disability in mainstream systems including employment. In the public sector, creating a succinct identifier for disability in administrative systems is a key challenge for public policy design and monitoring. This requires concise methods of identifying people with disability within systems, producing data comparable with population data to gauge accessibility and equity. We aimed to create disability-related questions of value to the purposes of an Australian state and contribute to literature on parsimonious and respectful disability identification for wider application. The research, completed in 2017, involved mapping and identification of key disability concepts for inclusion in new questions, focus groups to refine wording of new questions, and online surveys of employees evaluating two potential new question sets on the topic of disability and environment. Recommendations for new disability-related questions and possible new data collection processes are being considered and used by the leading state authority.