Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38787361›Full record

ArticleJournal of cell science2024

A short guide to addressing accessibility at scientific conferences.

Urszula Lucja McClurg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cell science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

1 author.

Urszula Lucja McClurgInstitute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology , University of Liverpool, Biosciences Building, Crown Street, Liverpool L69 7ZB, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2631-4174

Funding

University of Liverpool
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although encouraging progress to address issues of accessibility at scientific conferences has been made in recent years, further efforts are required to enact the comprehensive solutions necessary to accommodate the diverse needs of disabled scientists. This Opinion provides an easy-to-follow guide to ensuring that scientific conferences are accessible to disabled scientists and is aimed at conference organizers and funders in the field of cell biology. In this piece, I, a person who identifies as a disabled scientist, advocate for collective action within the cell biology community to promote the routine inclusion of accessibility officers on conference organizing panels and the use of accessibility checklists as part of applications for conference funding in order to build inclusive practices into conference planning and organization. I propose a move away from requiring personal disclosures of disability needs on a person-to-person basis towards community-agreed guidelines that ensure accessibility for scientists with a wide variety of needs. To that end, I detail a list of practical, cost-effective adjustments to standard conference activities that can enhance accessibility. Moreover, I suggest several long-term, high-impact changes - including guaranteeing the availability of wheelchair-accessible facilities and making hybrid meeting formats standard - aimed at enabling conference participation for all scientists.

Indexed as

Congresses as TopicHumansPersons with DisabilitiesAccessibilityConference inclusivityDisability

Identifiers

PMID38787361
PMCPMC11166461

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.