ArticleSN computer science2022
Accessibility of COVID-19 Websites of Asian Countries: An Evaluation Using Automated Tools.
Article in SN computer science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- User cum expert judgement model for accessibility using fuzzy approach.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Web accessibility helps in making the websites accessible for all. There has been too much research on the accessibility of websites across different domains such as education, health, banking, route services, Government portals, literature, etc. In this research, we have tried to explore the much less investigated domain of the accessibility analysis of COVID-19 vaccine registration and information websites of Asian Countries. The analysis has been done based on WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 guidelines. The evaluation has been done using automated tools including Access Monitor and AChecker. The results indicate that only 62% of the websites have passed the accessibility score. We have also identified common errors in these websites and have given recommendations for improvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.