Assistive technology use and unmet need in Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it