MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410744419 · doi:10.1080/07434618.2025.2508490

Dismantling societal barriers that limit people who need or use AAC: lived experiences, key research findings, and future directions

2025· review· en· W4410744419 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAugmentative and Alternative Communication · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersAdministration for Community LivingNational Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation ResearchU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsKey (lock)Limit (mathematics)Augmentative and alternative communicationLived experiencePsychologySociologyComputer sciencePsychotherapistPsychiatryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Society generally, and communication partners specifically, wield substantial power in determining access to augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) tools and controlling the opportunities for participation afforded to people who cannot rely on speech alone to be heard and understood. This paper integrates the lived experiences of people who need or use AAC with key research findings related to policy, practice, technology, attitude, knowledge, and skill barriers in society that limit people who need or use AAC. Future research and technology development is urgently required to dismantle societal barriers to ensure access to AAC and meaningful opportunities to participate in all aspects of society - education, employment, healthcare, leisure, family, and community.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.327
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it