Dalarna University's logo and link to the university's website

du.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • chicago-author-date
  • chicago-note-bibliography
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Development and Evaluation of eHealth Services Regarding Accessibility: Scoping Literature Review
Show others and affiliations
2023 (English)In: Journal of Medical Internet Research, E-ISSN 1438-8871, Vol. 25, article id e45118Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Accessibility is acknowledged as a key to inclusion in the Convention of Rights for People with Disabilities. An inaccessible design can result in exclusion from eHealth and cause disability among people who have impairments. OBJECTIVE: This scoping literature review aimed to investigate how eHealth services have been developed and evaluated regarding accessibility for people with impairments. METHODS: In line with Arksey and O'Malley's framework for scoping studies and using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), we conducted a search in 4 databases (PubMed, Scopus, IEEE, and Web of Science) in October 2020 and an update of the search in June 2022. The search strategy was structured according to the PICO model as follows: Population/Problem, digital accessibility for users with impairment; Intervention, health care delivered by any digital solution; Comparison, not applicable; Outcome, use of and adherence to (1) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), (2) other accessibility guidelines, and (3) other means, for designing or evaluating accessibility in eHealth services. A Boolean search was conducted by combining terms related to accessibility and eHealth. All authors participated in screening abstracts according to the eligibility criteria. Each publication, containing a potentially relevant abstract, was read (full text) and assessed for eligibility by 2 authors independently and pairwise. Publications deemed eligible were read by all authors and discussed for consensus. RESULTS: A total of 8643 publications were identified. After abstract screening, 131 publications remained for full-text reading. Of those, 116 publications were excluded as they did not meet the eligibility criteria. Fifteen publications involving studies of 12 eHealth services were included in the study. Of the 15 publications, 2 provided a definition of accessibility, 5 provided an explanation of accessibility, and 8 did not provide any explanation. Five publications used the WCAG to evaluate accessibility when developing eHealth services. One publication used International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 29138, ISO 2941, and ISO/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 30071-1 standards together with the Spanish Association for Standardization (UNE) 139803 standard. Eleven publications used other means to address accessibility, including text-level grading; literature review about accessibility; user tests, focus groups, interviews, and design workshops with target groups of patients, relatives, and health care professionals; and comparative analysis of existing technical solutions to provide information about useful requirements. CONCLUSIONS: Although a clear definition of accessibility can enhance operationalization and thus measurability when evaluating accessibility in eHealth services, accessibility was insufficiently defined in most of the included studies. Further, accessibility guidelines and standards were used to a very limited extent in the development and evaluation of eHealth services. Guidelines for developing complex interventions that include guidance for accessibility are motivated to ensure that accessibility will be considered systematically in eHealth services. ©Marika Jonsson, Stefan Johansson, Dena Hussain, Jan Gulliksen, Catharina Gustavsson. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 17.08.2023.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
NLM (Medline) , 2023. Vol. 25, article id e45118
Keywords [en]
accessibility, digital inclusion, disability, eHealth, scoping literature review, universal design, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, Consensus, Databases, Factual, Focus Groups, Health Personnel, Humans, Telemedicine, factual database, health care personnel, human, information processing
National Category
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:du-46830DOI: 10.2196/45118ISI: 001064943100001PubMedID: 37590050Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85168256037OAI: oai:DiVA.org:du-46830DiVA, id: diva2:1792070
Available from: 2023-08-28 Created: 2023-08-28 Last updated: 2024-01-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(315 kB)59 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 315 kBChecksum SHA-512
362371e077aed03256b3c1fb63e59b9c362e36eaa482a510f5a5d884c92c1f24749e40018a6c8599010256e88b5f19a946e8c80778b2e97d788275f4167c1428
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Gustavsson, Catharina

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Gustavsson, Catharina
By organisation
Medical Science
In the same journal
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 66 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 110 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • chicago-author-date
  • chicago-note-bibliography
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf