Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40515723›Full record

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

Unveiling underlying systemic isolation challenges for AAC users.

Grant Blasko

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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. 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.

Grant BlaskoIntegrated Social Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0009-0004-1347-1933

Funding

ACL HHS 90REGE0014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper examines systemic factors contributing to social isolation for people with communication disabilities, including those who could benefit from, or already rely on, Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) to be heard and understood. Building on existing studies of social isolation that focus on individual risk factors, this paper introduces the concept of systemic isolation, a less recognized form of isolation exacerbated by institutional and societal barriers perpetuating exclusion. By integrating interdisciplinary perspectives from social sciences, public health, and disability studies, the paper critiques established AAC practices, arguing that they often fall short in addressing AAC users' broader social and emotional needs. Specific examples illustrate how systemic barriers work to isolate AAC users - including simplified communication systems, overly restrictive privacy policies, lack of access to collective support and problem-solving, and prioritization of independence over interdependence. These practices exacerbate isolation beyond the risks posed by communication disability alone. There is a moral imperative to address these issues. This paper encourages collaboration between AAC users, researchers, and service providers to reevaluate communication support goals with a focus on preventing isolation and enhancing relational support. The hope is to foster environments that promote greater connection, well-being, and equitable participation for AAC users.

Indexed as

Communication Devices for People with DisabilitiesCommunication DisordersSocial IsolationHumansSocial SupportAACinterdependenceprivacy policiessocial isolationsystemic isolation

Identifiers

PMID40515723
PMCPMC13084300

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.