Cited by 58Assistive Technology in Communication and MobilityAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchDigital Accessibility for Disabilities

Implementing an iPad-based alternative communication device for a student with cerebral palsy and autism in the classroom via an access technology delivery protocol

Desai, Tania, Chow, Katherine, Mumford, Leslie, Hotze, Fanny, Chau, Tom·2014·Computers & Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.009

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Desai, T., Chow, K., Mumford, L., Hotze, F., & Chau, T.
Affiliations
  • Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Chau, Tom
Venue
Computers & Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-10
Volume
79
Pages
148-158
ISSN
0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2055175006
Cited by
58
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5
FWCI
11.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers & Education (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Sunny View Youth Involvement Foundation
  • Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
Keywords
augmentative and alternative communication, iPad, cerebral palsy, autism spectrum disorder, comorbidities, AAC training, communication skills, classroom implementation, parent training

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review