Exploring conceptual and collaborative structures in disability and rehabilitation: assistive technology -a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
from 2006 to 2025. The PRISMA framework and Bibliometrix software were utilised to analyse 1,884 articles indexed in Web of Science, with the objective of elucidating research trends, conceptual structures, and collaboration networks in the domain of assistive technology (AT). The findings indicate a significant rise in scholarly interest, particularly post-2020, with themes focusing on physical rehabilitation, cognitive-emotional support, user-centred design, accessibility, and inclusion. The present study adopts an interdisciplinary theoretical framework integrating the International Classification of Functioning (ICF), the social model of disability, and technology acceptance theories. The results demonstrate a transition from device-oriented research to user experience and social impact, reflecting the evolving nature of assistive technology (AT) as both a clinical tool and a driver of social participation. The United States and Canada are at the vanguard of global AT research, characterised by a high level of international collaboration. The objective of this comprehensive analysis is to inform future research, policy-making, and inclusive innovation strategies by mapping current knowledge and identifying conceptual and geographic gaps in the AT literature.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".