Assistive technology use and unmet need in Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Around the world, variations and inequities in access to assistive technology (AT) are evident. Development of legislation, policies, and programmes has not kept pace with the increasing demand for AT. Therefore, context-specific needs assessment is required, which can assist in anticipating the accessibility and human support needs of individuals with impairments, and in turn, inform resource allocation and prioritisation of services. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to describe the current use and unmet needs of AT use in community-dwelling Canadians experiencing activity limitation or participation restriction (disability). DATA AND METHODS: Bootstrapping was used to estimate the prevalence of AT use and unmet needs using data from the 2012 Canadian Survey on Disability (CSD). The total sample size for the CSD was 45,443 individuals. RESULTS: Among the estimated 3,775,920 Canadians with a disability (13.7% of the Canadian population), 3,579,580 used some form of AT. Among these individuals, 3,050,750 use glasses or contact lenses and 1,109,060 use bathroom aids. The results of the study showed that the most common unmet need was for hearing aids (0.86% of the total population), followed by bathroom aids (0.36%). INTERPRETATIONS: This study comes at a time when global attention is focussed on research on access to AT. This study using data from the CSD will serve disability and social policy analysts at all levels of government, as well as associations for persons with disabilities and researchers working in the field of disability policy and programmes.Implication for RehabilitationThe current initiatives on assistive technology, including the World Health Organization's Global Cooperation on Assistive Technology (GATE) project, recognize the substantial gap between the need for and provision of assistive devices. In Canada, for example, as well as in other countries, despite rapid growth in innovation, unmet needs for assistive devices persist and multiple barriers have been reported by individuals in accessing needed assistive devices. A better understanding of the met and unmet needs of assistive technology users can assist in anticipating accessibility and human support needs of individuals with disabilities, and in turn, inform resource allocation and prioritization of services. • The study estimates the prevalence of assistive device use in community dwelling Canadians and describes the unmet needs for assistive devices of Canadians with activity limitation (disability).• This study provides evidence on the use and unmet assistive technology needs for disability and social policy analysts at all levels of government, as well as associations for persons with disabilities and researchers working in the field of disability policy and programmes.• The results of this study can be used for planning and evaluating services, programmes and policies for Canadian adults with disabilities to help enable their full participation in society.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».