ReviewAugmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985)2025
To include us in our own worlds: AAC is not optional.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Dismantling societal barriers that limit people who need or use AAC: lived experiences, key research findings, and future directions.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2025Review
- External challenges for individuals who need or use AAC who are learning language: lived experiences, key research findings, and future directions.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2025Review
- Nothing about AAC users without AAC users: a call for meaningful inclusion in research, technology development, and professional training.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2025Review
- Unveiling underlying systemic isolation challenges for AAC users.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
AAC as a field, a category of technologies, and a culture has advanced tremendously and rapidly in the past 40 years, yet the vast majority of people who cannot rely on speech alone to be heard and understood still lack meaningful access to effective communication that meets their physical, emotional, social, and cultural needs, and fulfills the civil and human rights to which they are entitled. The following article discusses some of the underlying reasons for these access gaps, but more importantly, highlights their devastating effects: an entire disability community subjected to repeated, pervasive, and often lifelong trauma. Indeed, many of the "challenging behaviors" traditionally considered inherent to certain communication-related disabilities may actually be the result of communication deprivation and its complications, including lifelong experiences of ableism, abuse, and violence against which one has no recourse. With so much at stake, it is crucial that AAC researchers learn from the words of those of us with access to the tools we need to share them, toward the shared goal of a world where that access is ubiquitous.
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.