Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30990459›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2019

Mobility and Participation of People With Disabilities Using Mobility Assistive Technologies: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study.

François Routhier, W Ben Mortenson, Louise Demers, Atiya Mahmood, Habib Chaudhury, Kathleen A Martin Ginis, William C Miller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Participation and Functional Independence in Adults With Recessive Spastic Ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay.Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 2022
    Article
  4. Improving wheelchair route planning through instrumentation and navigation systems.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2020
    Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

François RouthierDepartment of Rehabilitation, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5458-6233
W Ben MortensonDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0183-6163
Louise DemersSchool of Rehabilitation, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8677-6296
Atiya MahmoodDepartment of Gerontology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4986-0979
Habib ChaudhuryDepartment of Gerontology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5770-3776
Kathleen A Martin GinisSchool of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7076-3594
William C MillerDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3060-0210
Simon Fraser University · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CACentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation · CAInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal · CAVancouver Coastal Health · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany community-dwelling individuals living with a disability use mobility assistive technologies (MATs). MAT devices are generally beneficial for individuals with mobility impairments. However, less is known about the specific factors that may foster or deter mobility and community participation.

objectiveThe purpose of this protocol is to describe the methodology for a study including three main objectives: (1) to understand the places people using MAT go and the things they do, (2) to identify perceived barriers and facilitators as well as users' desired environmental modifications, and (3) to understand subjective and objective issues related to environmental accessibility.

methodsA mixed-methods study was conducted in Vancouver and in Quebec City. Qualitative interviews were conducted to address all three objectives. In addition, Objective 1 was achieved through collection of global positioning system (GPS) data and activity diaries with 36 participants per site who represented six types of MAT users (ie, cane, walker, crutches, manual wheelchair, power wheelchair, and scooter). All participants were invited to take part in all aspects of data collection. PhotoVoice was used to address Objectives 2 and 3. Two environmental audits were used to address Objective 2. The Stakeholders' Walkability/Wheelability Audit in Neighbourhood (SWAN) measured perceptions related to a variety of community environmental features associated with mobility and participation. A total of 24 participants were recruited to each study site for SWAN data collection. The Measure of Environmental Accessibility (MEA) was also used to objectively measure access to exterior and interior environments selected earlier in the project by the participants that could benefit from improvements.

resultsFunding for this study was obtained from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Approval was obtained from the University of British Columbia Research Ethics Board and the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale Research Ethics Board. Regarding the MEA evaluations, 19 locations (ie, buildings and exterior spaces) where obstacles have been identified by the participants of the PhotoVoice focus groups have been evaluated in Quebec City and 20 locations have been identified in the Vancouver region by the participants of the community forums. Data collection for this project was completed in December 2018. Analysis and writing of manuscripts are underway.

conclusionsThe use of a variety of methods to gather data on participation and mobility will allow a more holistic consideration of factors influencing mobility with a MAT device. This study will provide objective information about the mobility of participants and identify barriers and facilitators that impact their mobility and community participation. Through the mixed-methods approach employed in this study, we will gain a subjective evaluation of the participants' neighborhoods, including personally meaningful information on environmental features that influence participants' everyday mobility and participation. We will also gain an objective evaluation of particular obstacles that community users of MAT identify as significant barriers to their ability to access public environments. We anticipate that these findings will help to identify a broad spectrum of solutions to improve the mobility and community participation of MAT users. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/12089.

Indexed as

assistive technologymobility limitationphysical barrierssocial participation

Identifiers

PMID30990459
PMCPMC6488954
OpenAlexW2905171864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.