ArticleFrontiers in sociology2026
AI and digital assistive technologies and reproductive rights among women with disabilities in Egypt: a qualitative SWOT study.
Article in Frontiers in sociology, 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
Introduction: This study examined the potential contribution of artificial intelligence (AI)-supported and digitally enabled assistive technologies to reproductive-health-related access among women with disabilities in Minya Governorate, Egypt. It focused on access to reproductive healthcare services and information and on anticipated informed decision-making. Methods: An exploratory qualitative case-study design was used. In-depth interviews were conducted with eight never-married women aged 15-49 years with physical ( Results: Participants perceived smart wheelchairs, prosthetic limbs, screen readers, smart canes, and AI-enhanced glasses as supporting mobility, navigation, information access, and potential access to healthcare services. Women with physical disabilities primarily emphasized mobility, whereas women with visual disabilities emphasized navigation and information access. Key barriers included high costs, limited maintenance services, privacy concerns, inaccessible infrastructure, insufficient healthcare-provider competencies, economic dependency, and social stigma. Discussion: AI-supported and digitally enabled assistive technologies may create enabling conditions for reproductive-health-related access and anticipated informed decision-making. However, the findings do not demonstrate that reproductive rights or improved health outcomes were directly achieved. Their perceived usefulness depended on supportive economic, institutional, infrastructural, familial, and sociocultural conditions. Given the small purposive sample and exploratory design, the findings are context-specific and should not be broadly generalized.
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.