Integrating artificial intelligence in supporting students with disabilities in higher education: An integrative review
Open accessAbstract
Artificial intelligence has the potential to significantly enhance accessibility, inclusivity, and academic performance for students with disabilities. This review investigates how AI-driven assistive technologies can support students with disabilities in higher education. Using an integrative review methodology, this study synthesizes peer-reviewed research published between 2020 and 2024 to assess the impact of AI-powered assistive technologies on the academic performance, engagement, and accessibility of students with disabilities in higher education. Thematic synthesis was used to categorize and analyze the data from 27 papers, identifying five major themes: personalized learning, the benefits of AI-driven assistive technology, adoption challenges, institutional barriers, and best practices for AI implementation. The analysis identifies gaps in the current research, including the insufficient evaluation of underrepresented disabilities and the ethical considerations regarding AI usage.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Existing work mostly focuses on the use of AI for accessibility for individual use, such as by disabled students.
“Existing work mostly focuses on the use of AI for accessibility for individual use (e.g., disabled students, [6, 27]); organizational-level adaptation may also be very helpful for ensuring an accessible and inclusive higher education institution.”
From Rethinking “Empowering Technology” in Higher Education Accessibility: A Case Study of Disabled Students’ Experiences at a German University (2026) · cites this paper as [27]
Recent technologies increasingly prioritize individualized accessibility solutions, such as AI, while overlooking broader systemic opportunities for institutional transformation.
“This trend is evident in the way recent technologies increasingly prioritize individualized accessibility solutions (e.g., AI [6, 27]), while overlooking the broader, systemic opportunities for institutional transformation.”
From Rethinking “Empowering Technology” in Higher Education Accessibility: A Case Study of Disabled Students’ Experiences at a German University (2026) · cites this paper as [27]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 50 · Cited by 27
- Authors
- Dumitru, C., Muttashar Abdulsahib, G., Ibrahim Khalaf, O., & Bennour, A.
- Affiliations
- Universitatea Națională de Știință și Tehnologie Politehnica București (RO)
- University of Technology
- Al-Nahrain University
- Université Larbi Tébessi (DZ)
- Corresponding author
- Dumitru, Cristina
- Venue
- Technology and Disability
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2025-07-05
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-24
- ISSN
- 1055-4181 (ISSN-L)
- 1878-643X
- OpenAlex
- W4412047563
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 27
- FWCI
- 27.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Technology and Disability (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence, assistive technology, students with disabilities, higher education, accessibility, inclusivity, academic performance, student engagement, personalized learning, AI adoption barriers, institutional barriers, AI ethics
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
