Cited by 44Disability Education and EmploymentDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesOnline and Blended Learning

A systematic review of academic interventions for students with disabilities in Online Higher Education

Open access
Reyes, José Israel, Meneses, Julio, Melián, Efrem·2022·European Journal of Special Needs Education

Abstract

The development of new educational environments based on the use of ICT has enabled the possibility to improve access and involvement for students with disabilities at the university level. Hence, this systematic review attempts to synthesise the main findings of previous interventions aimed to promote the inclusion of these students in Online Higher Education, as well as to analyse their contribution on the students’ academic success, by considering the principles of both Universal Instructional Design and Universal Design for Learning. A systematic search was conducted in four databases (WOS, Scopus, ERIC, and ProQuest) following the PRISMA-P statement. This search yielded 15 articles according to the defined criteria. Four thematic categories were identified throughout a thematic synthesis: Accessibility, support, socialisation, and academic success. The findings show that both accessibility and support are important factors for promoting the disabled students’ academic success in Online Higher Education but also highlight the need to apply the Universal Design in the whole system. Furthermore, the issues of academic support, inclusive pedagogical practices, and socialisation should be deeply analysed to inquire about their contribution to the students with disabilities’ academic success. Lastly, the limitations of this study and future implication for research are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08856257.2021.1911525

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reyes, J. I., Meneses, J., & Melián, E.
Affiliations
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (ES)
Corresponding author
Reyes, José Israel
Venue
European Journal of Special Needs Education
Published
2021-04-08
Volume
37
Issue
4
Pages
569-586
ISSN
  • 0885-6257 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-591X
OpenAlex
W3150434476
Cited by
44
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6
FWCI
1.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • European Journal of Special Needs Education (publishedVersion)
  • O2 - Repositori Institucional (Universitat Oberta de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Fundació per a la Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (2019/00003/001/006/006)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
Keywords
students with disabilities, online higher education, academic intervention, Universal Design for Learning, universal instructional design, inclusive education, accessibility, academic support, socialization, academic performance, inclusive pedagogy

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