ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Need equality and access equity to assistive products across genders and locations in 29 countries: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Evidence from nationally representative assistive product studies on needs equality and access equity is essential for effectively targeting measures by health and other services to improve access to assistive products. This multi-country study explored equality regarding the need for and equity regarding access to assistive products across genders and locations. Materials and methods: This cross-sectional study analyzed aggregated self-reported data from 24 nationally and five sub-nationally representative surveys in countries with Human Development Index (HDI) ranging from 0.452 to 0.945. In 27 surveys, participants of all ages had been recruited through two-stage cluster sampling, while in two surveys participants aged 18 and above were recruited through simple random sampling. Individual-level data were collected through the Rapid Assistive Technology Assessment (rATA) questionnaire using personal, telephone, or web interviewing in 2019-2021. The main outcomes were assistive product needs inequality and access inequity, defined as the ratio of the difference in need or access between two sub-populations to the need or access in the total population. Results: Data were collected from 323,647 individuals of whom 44.9%-57.2% were women and 10.1%-89.5% lived in rural locations across the countries. Although varying considerably between countries, the need for assistive products including spectacles was generally higher among women while access was lower in rural areas and among women. Excluding spectacles, the need was higher and the access was lower in rural areas and among women. The access inequity between rural and urban areas was large (26% of the median access including spectacles, and 42% excluding spectacles) while it was smaller between women and men (6.4% including and 13% excluding spectacles). Access inequity decreased with increasing HDI. Conclusion: In efforts to achieve universal access to assistive products, especially location but also gender ought to be considered.
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.