Apparel purchasing priorities in people living with disabilities: a metasynthesis
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
Purpose Despite their significant presence in the apparel sector, people with disabilities remain underserved, as mainstream ready-to-wear garments often fail to meet their basic needs. This paper aims to present an empirical analysis of apparel preferences among disabled individuals, providing a framework for understanding their specific requirements. Disabled consumers represent a vital yet overlooked market with the potential to drive demand and inspire innovation in garment technology, thereby raising industry standards both technically and ethically. Design/methodology/approach The authors synthesize seven purely qualitative and two mixed-methods articles, strictly following the meta-ethnographic process. Findings At present, clothing products primarily address only the most basic functional needs of consumers with disabilities. Disabled consumers tend to prioritize functionality above all other aspects when selecting apparel. Research limitations/implications Among 2 million search results, most studies use quantitative methods, with few adopting qualitative approaches that capture real-life challenges in detail, revealing a methodological gap. The authors hope future research will explore the cognitive flow of individuals with disabilities as they consider clothing purchases. Specifically, the authors propose examining the progression of their thoughts: beginning with the product’s function, followed by its potential for self-expression, alignment with mainstream fashion trends and, finally, the ease or difficulty of the purchasing process. Key questions include: What are the specific barriers to purchasing, and can online shopping help alleviate these challenges? In addition, the authors are interested in the role of e-commerce in low- and middle-income countries, where limited return options may complicate the buying process for those with disabilities. Practical implications The findings highlight the urgent need to prioritize adaptive clothing design that effectively balances functionality with aesthetic appeal. Companies should invest in research and development to create garments that not only fulfill usability requirements but also expand style options. Moreover, retailers should focus on building accessible shopping experiences, both online and in physical stores, to better accommodate the diverse needs of consumers with disabilities. Social implications All nine studies were carried out in developed countries (the USA, Sweden, Norway and Canada), highlighting that understanding and improving the apparel needs of consumers with disabilities remain largely overlooked, even in high-income nations. Society must pay greater attention to this issue to enhance the overall well-being of people with disabilities and foster inclusivity. Originality/value Among over 2 million search results related to garment needs and disabilities, nine qualitative studies specifically examine the challenges and requirements of this population. This paper offers a comprehensive review of the existing literature, making a significant contribution to scholarly discourse in this underresearched area.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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