tunities for collaboration with regard to the ways in which services are structured orga nizationally at a national level, which federal agencies are relevant for setting policy and funding, and how those system components relate (or fail to relate) to the vision rehabili tation system. Also relevant is the structure of third-party payment for services, especially if there may be special inclusionary or exclu sionary aspects for people with vision loss. Many other important systems could have been included here that deliver health ser vices as part of their mission (the schools and the prison system, for example) or deliver health to a population subgroup (such as mili tary veterans), or deliver services defi ned by health conditions (for example, dental health). Regrettably, the authors we contacted to write those pieces were unavailable within the time frame of this special supplement. Again, per haps informed readers with something to say about themes and topics not addressed here will be moved to contribute to future issues of the journal.
[1]
E. Wang,et al.
Development and validation of AIMFREE: Accessibility Instruments Measuring Fitness and Recreation Environments
,
2004,
Disability and rehabilitation.
[2]
Amy Rauworth,et al.
Physical activity participation among persons with disabilities: barriers and facilitators.
,
2004,
American journal of preventive medicine.
[3]
J. Rimmer.
The Conspicuous Absence of People with Disabilities in Public Fitness and Recreation Facilities: Lack of Interest or Lack of Access?
,
2005,
American journal of health promotion : AJHP.
[4]
R. Brownson,et al.
Environmental and policy determinants of physical activity in the United States.
,
2001,
American journal of public health.