ArticleInternational journal of public health2026
Inclusion through technology: findings from a public engagement approach.
Article in International journal of public health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Many people with disabilities in Switzerland face exclusion, especially in mobility, work, and leisure. Assistive technologies can support participation and wellbeing, particularly when developed with user involvement. This study explored societal perspectives on inclusion through technology using a public engagement approach. Methods: The study took place at the Swiss Abilities Fair 2024 in Lucerne. At an interactive booth, visitors tested assistive technologies like a robotic arm and a recumbent trike. They shared their views in semi-structured interviews conducted by physiotherapists and a wheelchair-using researcher. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The sample included people with and without disabilities. Results: Forty-one people participated. Non-disabled participants emphasized equality and acceptance, while those with mobility impairments focused on barriers and support. Assistive technologies were seen as key to independence, though gaps in innovation, access, and affordability remain. Conclusion: Inclusion is a shared societal responsibility that requires awareness, participation, and adaptable solutions. While assistive technologies support independence and participation, interviewees emphasized that true inclusion also depends on affordability, access, user involvement, and broader structural change.
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.