The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Barriers and facilitators to the use of high‐technology augmentative and alternative communication devices: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis
Abstract
Abstract Background: There has been a rapid growth in recent years of available technologies for individuals with communication difficulties. Research in the area is currently underdeveloped with practitioners having a limited body of work on which to draw to guide the process of intervention. Concerns have been raised that this newly developed technology may have limited functional usage. Aims: This review aims to investigate the potential barriers and facilitators to high‐technology AAC provision and its ongoing use. The aim of the analysis is to explore factors underpinning use rather than effectiveness, thus it synthesized data from predominantly qualitative and survey studies reporting the views and perceptions of AAC users or staff providing the devices. Main Contribution: The review highlights the range of factors that can impact on provision and use of high‐technology AAC, which practitioners should consider and address as appropriate in the intervention process. These include: ease of use of the device; reliability; availability of technical support; voice/language of the device; decision‐making process; time taken to generate a message; family perceptions and support; communication partner responses; service provision; and knowledge and skills of staff. The work outlines how qualitative synthesis review methods may be applied to the consideration of published material that is not reporting outcomes data, and how this may provide valuable information to inform future studies. Conclusions: Practitioners should be aware of barriers and facilitators to successful use when making recommendations, and consider how barriers where present might be overcome. Aspects of service delivery such as ongoing technical support and staff training may require further consideration. The synthesis of evidence describing views of users and providers, and the implementation of high‐technology AAC systems, can provide valuable data to inform intervention studies and functional outcome measures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies
Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009) · Health Information & Libraries Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x · Cited by 10,817
Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-45 · Cited by 9,312
Cited by
Light, J., & McNaughton, D. (2014) · Augmentative and Alternative Communication · doi:10.3109/07434618.2014.885080 · Cited by 406
Duplaga, M. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0179825 · Cited by 147
Kane, S. K., Morris, M. R., Paradiso, A., & Campbell, J. (2017) · Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing · doi:10.1145/2998181.2998284 · Cited by 50
Communication aid requirements of intensive care unit patients with transient speech loss
Mobasheri, M. H., King, D., Judge, S., Arshad, F., Larsen, M., Safarfashandi, Z., Shah, H., Trepekli, A., Trikha, S., Xylas, D., et al. (2016) · Augmentative and Alternative Communication · doi:10.1080/07434618.2016.1235610 · Cited by 44
Self-citationNeeds and preferences for psychological interventions of people with motor neuron disease
Weeks, K. R., Gould, R. L., Mcdermott, C., Lynch, J., Goldstein, L. H., Graham, C. D., McCracken, L., Serfaty, M., Howard, R., Al-Chalabi, A., et al. (2019) · Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration · doi:10.1080/21678421.2019.1621344 · Cited by 36
Metadata
- Authors
- Baxter, S., Enderby, P., Evans, P., & Judge, S.
- Venue
- International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-12-05
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 115-129
- ISSN
- 1368-2822 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-6984
- OpenAlex
- W1834051229
- Cited by
- 298
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 2.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Barriers and facilitators to the use of high‐technology augmentative and alternative communication devices: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00090.x
- The paper
- Baxter, S., Enderby, P., Evans, P., & Judge, S. (2012). Barriers and facilitators to the use of high‐technology augmentative and alternative communication devices: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00090.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.