Primary caregivers’ perspectives on the use of assistive technologies in children with physical disabilities: a qualitative systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background/Aims Assistive technologies are critical for promoting independence and participation in children with physical disabilities. Assistive technology refers to any item, equipment, or product system used to increase, maintain, or improve the functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities. However, the successful use of these tools relies heavily on the role of primary caregivers. This qualitative systematic review was conducted to investigate primary caregivers’ perspectives on the use of assistive technologies in children with physical disabilities. Methods Four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Medline, and Web of Science) were systematically searched from 2002 to 2025. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline was used to report the literature search in different phases, and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme was used to evaluate the studies that met the inclusion criteria. Buttler's thematic analysis approach for qualitative research was used for data synthesis. Results A total of eight qualitative studies were included. Two analytical themes related to perspectives of primary caregivers on the use of assistive technologies in children with physical disabilities were explored: positive effects of using assistive technologies and barriers and challenges of using assistive technologies. Primary caregivers view assistive technologies as valuable tools for enhancing children's independence, participation, communication and overall quality of life. However, their effective use is often hindered by funding challenges, limited caregiver training, stigma, language barriers, and inconsistent professional and community support. Optimising assistive technology outcomes requires addressing these barriers alongside device provision. Conclusions Assistive technologies are essential tools that can enhance the lives of children with physical disabilities. These technologies can empower them to participate in everyday activities, fostering independence and improving their overall quality of life. Caregivers have the ability to encourage or hinder the use of assistive technologies; therefore exploring caregivers’ perspectives is crucial in ensuring the successful adoption and use of assistive technologies Implications for practice For allied health professionals, these findings highlight the importance of adopting a family-centred approach by involving caregivers in all stages of assistive technology assessment, selection and follow-up. Providing practical, hands-on training and ongoing support can enhance caregivers’ confidence and promote successful device use. Professionals should also address stigma and accessibility by ensuring that assistive technology solutions fit seamlessly into children's daily routines and supporting families in managing social perceptions. Additionally, facilitating access to funding, streamlining service pathways and collaborating closely with schools, community services and other rehabilitation specialists are essential to optimise assistive technology integration and maximise benefits for children and their families.
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 | 0,038 | 0,061 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,012 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».