ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2025
Global availability of guidelines related to assistive technology: a scoping review.
Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bridging Technology and Healthcare: A Bibliometric Review of Assistive Technologies in Hospital Environments.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Global practices in AT provision: considerations for a national assistive technology policy for health in India.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Given the rising global demand for assistive technology, predicted to encompass 3.5 billion people by 2050, understanding the availability of guidelines governing its use and identifying potential gaps is paramount. Objective: This scoping review mapped existing guidelines related to assistive technology. The review aimed to inform future research and guideline development to accelerate access to assistive technology within universal health coverage. Methods: Following the JBI methodology, a systematic search of guidelines published between January 2008 and March 2024 was conducted across CINAHL, Google Scholar, PubMed, TRIP and WHO IRIS. Included guidelines related to specific assistive technology, including product types and services for users and their caregivers. Guidelines targeting system-level interventions were excluded. Results: The search identified 291 records, of which 24 guidelines were included. They focus on improving health outcomes for diverse populations across different healthcare settings. Most guidelines originated from high-income countries and predominantly addressed commonly known assistive products for mobility, hearing, vision, and self-care. There is a gap in guidelines for assistive products for cognition and communication. The identified guidelines primarily followed evidence-based methodologies and involved assistive technology users in their development. Conclusions: This review provides a crucial overview of the existing landscape of assistive technology guidelines. It calls for further action to harmonize standards, leverage innovation in evidence generation, and enhance guideline development to better serve the global population in need of assistive technology.
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.