Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30922882›Full record

ArticleArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitation2019

Accessibility of Medical Diagnostic Equipment for Patients With Disability: Observations From Physicians.

Nicole Agaronnik, Eric G Campbell, Julie Ressalam, Lisa I Iezzoni

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Skin-Inspired Healthcare Electronics.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Ensuring the Reproductive Rights of Women with Intellectual Disability.Journal of intellectual & developmental disability · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nicole AgaronnikMongan Institute Health Policy Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, the United States.
Eric G CampbellCenter for Bioethics and Humanities, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, the United States.
Julie RessalamCenter for Bioethics and Humanities, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, the United States.
Lisa I IezzoniMongan Institute Health Policy Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, the United States; Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, the United States. Electronic address: liezzoni@mgh.harvard.edu.
Massachusetts General Hospital · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

Surveying Physicians to Understand Health Care Disparities Affecting Persons with Disability and Identify Approaches to Improve Their CareR01HD091211 · NICHD · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI IEZZONI, LISA I. · 2018 to 2020
$1.7M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD091211
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore attitudes and practices of physicians relating to accessible medical diagnostic equipment in serving patients with mobility disability.

designOpen-ended individual telephone interviews, which reached data saturation. Interview recordings were transcribed verbatim for qualitative conventional content analysis.

settingMassachusetts, the United States, October 2017-January 2018.

participantsPracticing physicians from 5 clinical specialties (N=20).

interventionsNot applicable.

main outcome measuresCommon themes concerning physical accessibility.

resultsMean ± SD time in practice was 27.5±12.5 years; 14 practices had height-adjustable examination tables; and 7 had wheelchair-accessible weight scales. The analysis identified 6 broad themes: height-adjustable examination tables have advantages; height-adjustable examination tables have drawbacks; transferring patients onto examination tables is challenging; rationale for examining patients in their wheelchairs; perceptions of wheelchair-accessible weight scales; and barriers and facilitators to improving physical accessibility. Major barriers identified by participants included costs of equipment, limited space, and inadequate payment for extra time required to care for persons with disability. Even physicians with accessible examination tables sometimes examined patients seated in their wheelchairs.

conclusionsEven if physicians have accessible equipment, they do not always use it in examining patients with disability. Future efforts will need to consider ways to eliminate these access barriers in clinical practice. Given small sample size, results are not generalizable to physicians nationwide and globally.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelPersons with DisabilitiesAdultAgedDiagnostic EquipmentFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysiciansUnited StatesWheelchairsDiagnostic equipmentDisabled personsExamination tablesMedical staff, hospitalRehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID30922882
PMCPMC6761045
OpenAlexW2924205541

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.