ArticlePLOS digital health2026
Contribution of artificial intelligence research to the development of inclusive applications for people with disabilities: A scoping review (2015-2025).
Article in PLOS digital 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming healthcare. Yet people with disabilities (PWD), representing 16% of the global population, remain disproportionately excluded from these advances. This exclusion is driven by algorithmic bias, non-representative datasets, and limited involvement of PWD in the design, development, and evaluation of AI applications. This scoping review examines the extent to which AI research in health contributes to the development of inclusive technologies for PWD, focusing on equity considerations. It identifies current trends, methodological gaps, and opportunities for socially responsive innovation. We conducted a systematic search across MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL for the 2015-2025 period, following Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage scoping review methodology and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Data were extracted and synthesized thematically using the Population-Concept-Context approach. Of 4,233 references retrieved, 93 studies were included. Most studies originated from high-income countries, particularly in North America (45.2%) and Europe (26.9%). AI applications addressed motor, sensory, cognitive, communication-related, and psychosocial disabilities, with emphasis on prediction/diagnosis, assistive technologies, and personalized care. While about 60% of studies referenced equity, only 12 (12.9%) implemented concrete measures (e.g., adapting tools for vulnerable groups or ensuring sample diversity), and only six (6.5%) actively involved PWD through co-design or user validation. AI holds significant potential to enhance autonomy, access, and quality of life for PWD. Realizing this promise will require moving beyond technical optimization to embrace inclusive design, participatory methods, and equity-driven frameworks aligned with responsible AI development and use.
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.