Publications
Filter by type
- All
- PhD
- Working Paper
- Workshop
- Editorial
- Conference Paper
- Journal Paper
- Landscape review
- Toolkit
- Book
- Article
- Report
Filter by research group
- All
- Disability Interactions
- Physiological Computing
- Social Justice
- Humanitarian & Disasters
- Local Productions
Type
Research Group
Jamie Danemayer & Myung-Joon Lim
Korea is a rapidly ageing country, with its population over 65 years old increasing from 5% in 1990 to 17% in 2021. Comparatively, the global population over 65 has increased from 6% in 1990 to 9% in 2019 ]. As populations age and functional difficulties become more prevalent, the importance of assistive technology (AT) provision becomes more pronounced. Disparities in access to AT within a population can indicate inequities in healthy aging trajectories that will widen as the overall population ages, if clusters of limited access are not identified and addressed.
Taylor & Francis Online; 2023
Type
Research Group
Emma M. Smith, Malcolm MacLachlan, Ikenna D. Ebuenyi, Catherine Holloway & Victoria Austin
While the inadequacies of our existing assistive technology systems, policies, and services have been highlighted by the acute and rapidly changing nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, these failures are also present and important during non-crisis times. Each of these actions, taken together, will not only address needs for more robust and resilient systems for future crises, but also the day-to-day needs of all assistive technology users. We have a responsibility as a global community, and within our respective countries, to address these inadequacies now to ensure an inclusive future.
Disability & Society; 2020
Type
Research Group
This year (2022) has seen the publication of the World’s first Global Report on Assistive Technology (GReAT) [1]. This completes almost a decade of work to ensure assistive technology (AT) access is a core development issue. The lack of access to assistive products (APs), such as wheelchairs, hearing aids, and eyeglasses, as well as less well-referenced products such as incontinence pads, mobile phone applications, or walking sticks, affects as many as 2.5 billion people globally. Furthermore, the provision of APs would reap a 1:9 return on investment [2]. This could result in a family in need netting (or living without) over GBP 100,000 in their lifetime [2] or more, if we count dynamic overspills in the economy such as employment of assistive technology services and manufacturing of devices [3].
Societies; 2021
Type
Research Group
Victoria Austin, Catherine Holloway, Ignacia Ossul Vermehren, Abs Dumbuya, Giulia Barbareschi and Julian Walker
The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that there are currently one billion people in the world who need access to assistive technology (AT). Yet over 90% currently do not have access to assistive products (AP)—such as wheelchairs, hearing aids, walking sticks and eyeglasses—they need, nor and the systems and services necessary to support their appropriate provision [1]. This shocking deficit is set to double by 2050, with about two billion of us likely to require AT but no anticipated reduction in lack of access. The World Health Organisation defines AT as the “the umbrella term covering the systems and services related to the delivery of assistive products and services”, which are products that “maintain or improve an individual’s functioning and independence, thereby promoting their well-being” [2], and the importance of AT provision is strongly highlighted in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) [3]. AT has also been shown to be essential to achieving many of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) [4]. Without access to AT, many persons with disabilities are unable to go to school, be active in their communities, earn an income, or play a full role in their families [5]. As a recent study found, “AT can make the impossible possible for people living with a wide range of impairments, but a lack of access to basic AT …excludes individuals and reduces their ability to live full, enjoyable, and independent lives” [6].
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health; 2021
Type
Research Group
Chapal Khasnabis, Catherine Holloway, Malcolm MacLachlan
We are now in an era of assistive care and assistive living—whereby many people, of all ages, in good health, and those who are more frail, or with cognitive or functional impairments, are using a broad range of technologies to assist and enhance their daily living. Assistive living1 is becoming an important part of population health and rehabilitation, which can help to maximise an individual's abilities, regardless of age or functional capacity. This encouraging shift in ethos has been strengthened by the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in which a plethora of digital and remote technologies have been used.
The Lancet; 2020
Type
Research Group
Giulia Barbareschi, Mark T. Carew, Elizabeth Aderonke Johnson, Norah Kopi, Catherine Holloway
Stigmatizing attitudes and beliefs towards disability represent one of the most pervasive and complex barriers that limits access to health care, education, employment, civic rights and opportunities for socialization for people with disabilities [1,2,3]. The damaging impact of disability stigma is widely acknowledged and, according to article 8 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with disabilities, developing strategies, campaigns, policies and other initiatives to combat disability stigma and ensure that all people with disabilities are treated with dignity and respect is also a duty of the 182 countries who ratified the treaty [4]. Although the majority of literature focused on understanding disability stigma has been carried out in high-income settings [5,6,7], in the last decade, an increasing number of scholars have conducted studies looking at the negative stereotypes, prejudices and inaccurate beliefs that shape disability stigma in the Global South [3,8,9,10]. Most of these studies have described how these stigmatizing beliefs are often driven by a combination of personal and societal factors, ranging from misconceptions concerning the causes of different impairments (e.g., disability to be seen as a form of curse or punishment); assumptions about the lack of capabilities of people with disabilities; or discriminatory practices that actively endorse separation between people with and without disabilities [3,9,11,12]. Yet, there is a dearth of comparative studies that examine the perspectives of both people with and without disabilities of disability stigma and discrimination, including how the use of assistive technology may shape stigmatizing interactions.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health; 2021
