Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40488584›Full record

ReviewAugmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985)2025

Reading, writing, and AAC are fundamental.

Bob Williams

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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.

Bob WilliamsCommunicationFIRST, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

ACL HHS 90REGE0014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Having significant disabilities circumscribes the agency of millions of people to use reading and writing to live their lives. Disability should not be used to justify consigning those needing AAC to being treated as having few literacy skills. Access to language-based communication and literacy tools is essential to safeguarding and securing human and civil rights. The following actions must be undertaken to secure access to communication and literacy for people who need or use AAC: (1) Sustained research, demonstration, and system change efforts should be carried out at all levels to rectify the denial of communication and language supports for people with congenital and acquired disabilities; (2) Society must invest in strategies that enhance literacy opportunities and outcomes for people who need or use AAC at every stage of life; (3) Participatory action research must be prioritized to identify and remedy discrimination against Black, indigenous, brown, and non-English-using children and adults who need AAC; (4) Data must be collected and used to ensure the rights and bolster the everyday participation of all who need AAC; and (5) A blueprint should be issued on what must be done to secure these individuals' full civil rights and liberties.

Indexed as

Communication Devices for People with DisabilitiesCommunication DisordersLiteracyPersons with DisabilitiesReadingWritingChildCivil RightsHuman RightsHumansAACcommunication accessdiscriminationhuman and civil rightsliteracyresearch priorities

Identifiers

PMID40488584
PMCPMC13093491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.