ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2026
Stakeholder Perceptions of an Abbreviated Survey to Assess the Accessibility of Community-Based Physical Activity for People With Limited Mobility.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: An abbreviated Community Accessibility Snapshot (CAS) was developed to provide a rapid, user‑friendly method for assessing the accessibility of community physical activity environments for individuals with limited mobility. This study aimed to explore stakeholder perceptions of the CAS and its accompanying rating tiers to inform refinement of the instrument. Design: We used a focus group design with thematic analysis. Setting: Focus group interviews were conducted through remote meetings. Participants: Sixteen adults (N=16) representing 2 stakeholder groups: adults with mobility limitations (n=14) and professionals working in fitness or recreational sport facilities (n=2). Participants were adults spanning a wide age range (mean±SD: 52±15y). Convenience sampling and recruitment through national disability‑focused platforms may limit generalizability, and the small number of professionals constrains provider‑specific insights. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Stakeholder feedback on survey clarity, feasibility, and interpretability, collected through focus group transcripts coded independently by 2 researchers. Results: Four focus groups yielded themes related to (1) factors shaping accessibility experiences, (2) strengths of the CAS, and (3) recommended revisions. Participants highlighted the need for clear distinctions among rating tiers, reduced respondent burden, and inclusion of visual aids. Intercoder agreement was 97%. Stakeholder input guided revisions to survey wording, domain structure, and rating tier definitions. Although thematic saturation was reached among adults with mobility limitations, the small professional sample represents a limitation. Future research should examine age‑related differences in CAS usability and conduct a psychometric evaluation of the revised instrument. Conclusions: The CAS shows promise as a brief, end‑user-focused tool to communicate accessibility of community-based physical activity settings for adults with mobility limitations. Incorporating stakeholder feedback strengthens the tool's clarity and usability. Further work is needed to assess reliability, validity, and applicability across diverse age groups and facility types.
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.