Lived experience of using assistive technology for sandy beach based leisure for Australian people with mobility limitations

References

• Georgiou M, Morison G, Smith N, et al. Mechanisms of impact of blue spaces on human health: a systematic literature review and Meta-Analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;318(5):2486.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Britton E, Kindermann G, Domegan C, et al. Blue care: a systematic review of blue space interventions for health and wellbeing. Health Promot Int. 2020;35(1):50–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Job S, Heales L, Obst S. Oceans of opportunity for universal beach accessibility: an integrated model for health and wellbeing in people with disability. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2022;46(3):252–254.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darcy S, Maxwell H, Edwards M, et al. Disability inclusion in beach precincts: beach for all abilities – a community development approach through a social relational model of disability lens. Sport Management Review. 2023;26(1):1–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Job S, Heales L, Obst S. Tides of Change-Barriers and facilitators to beach accessibility for older people and people with disability: an Australian community survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(9):5651.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Buchanan R, Layton N. Innovation in assistive technology: voice of the user. Societies. 2019;9(2):48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krantz O. Assistive devices utilisation in activities of everyday life-a proposed framework of understanding a user perspective. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2012;7(3):189–198.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Verdonck M, Steggles E, Nolan M, et al. Experiences of using an environmental control system (ECS) for persons with high cervical spinal cord injury: the interplay between hassle and engagement. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014;9(1):70–78.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ripat J, Verdonck M, Carter RJ. The meaning ascribed to wheeled mobility devices by individuals who use wheelchairs and scooters: a metasynthesis. Disab Rehabil Assist Technol. 2018;13(3):253–262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ripat J, Verdonck M, Gacek C, et al. A qualitative metasynthesis of the meaning of speech-generating devices for people with complex communication needs. Augment Altern Commun. 2019;35(2):69–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mavritsakis O, Treschow M, Labbé D, et al. Up on the hill: the experiences of adaptive snow sports. Disabil Rehabil. 2021;43(15):2219–2226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merrick D, Hillman K, Wilson A, et al. All aboard: users’ experiences of adapted paddling programs. Disabil Rehabil. 2021;43(20):2945–2951.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James L, Shing J, Mortenson WB, et al. Experiences with and perceptions of an adaptive hiking program. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40(13):1584–1590.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ripat JD, Woodgate RL. The role of assistive technology in self-perceived participation. Int J Rehabil Res. 2012;35(2):170–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedersen H, Söderström S, Kermit PS. The fact that i can be in front of others, I am used to being a bit behind": how assistive activity technology affects participation in everyday life. Disab Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021;16(1):83–91.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Menzies A, Mazan C, Borisoff JF, et al. Outdoor recreation among wheeled mobility users: perceived barriers and facilitators. Disab Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021;16(4):384–390.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiske J, Hodge B, Turner G. Myths of Oz: reading Australian popular culture. New York: Routledge; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Ashworth P. An approach to phenomenological psychology: the contingencies of the lifeworld. J Phenomenol Psychol. 2003;34(2):145–156.
   Google Scholar
• Ashworth PD. The lifeworld - enriching qualitative evidence. Qual Res Psychol. 2016;13(1):20–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langdridge D. Phenomenological psychology: theory, research and method. Harlow: Prentice Hall; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Finlay L, Gough B. Reflexivity: a practical guide for researchers in health and social sciences. Malden (MA): Blackwell Science; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Flick U. An introduction to qualitative research. Los Angeles: Sage; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Kelley K, Clark B, Brown V, et al. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. Int J Qual Health Care. 2003;15(3):261–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kroll T, Barbour R, Harris J. Using focus groups in disability research. Qual Health Res. 2007;17(5):690–698.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke V, Braun V. Successful qualitative research: a practical guide for beginners. London: Sage; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Starks H, Brown Trinidad S. Choose your method: a comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Qual Health Res. 2007;17(10):1372–1380.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. Thousand oaks (CA), London: Sage Publications; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Harper D. Talking about pictures: a case for photo elicitation. Visual Stud. 2002;17(1):13–26.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qual Res Psychol. 2021;18(3):328–352.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Shenton AK. Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. EFI. 2004;22(2):63–75.
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter C, Suto MJ, editors. Qualitative research for occupational and physical therapists: a practical guide. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons. 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang G, Poulsen DV, Lygum VL, et al. Health-Promoting nature access for people with mobility impairments: a systematic review. IJERPH. 2017;14(7):703.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundberg NR, Taniguchi S, McCormick BP, et al. Identity negotiating: redefining stigmatized identities through adaptive sports and recreation participation among individuals with a disability. J Leisure Res. 2011;43(2):205–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMillen A-M, Söderberg S. Disabled persons’ experience of dependence on assistive devices. Scand J Occup Ther. 2002;9(4):176–183.
   Google Scholar
• Parette P, Scherer M. Assistive technology use and stigma. Educ Train Develop Disab. 2004;39(3):217–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray CD, Forshaw MJ. The experience of amputation and prosthesis use for adults: a metasynthesis. Disabil Rehabil. 2013;35(14):1133–1142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Desmond D, Layton N, Bentley J, et al. Assistive technology and people: a position paper from the first global research, innovation and education on assistive technology (GREAT) summit. Disab Rehabil Assist Technol. 2018;13(5):437–444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hocking C. Function or feelings: factors in abandonment of assistive devices. TAD. 1999;11(1-2):3–11.
   Google Scholar
• Santana-Santana SB, Peña-Alonso C, Espino P-C. E. Assessing universal accessibility in spanish beaches. Ocean Coast Manage. 2021;201:105486.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sk N-J, Kim K-B, Oh C. Beaches for everyone? Marine tourism for mobility impaired visitors in Busan. Korea J Coast Res. 2021;114(sp1):375–379.
   Google Scholar
• Waldron D, Layton N. Hard and soft assistive technologies: defining roles for clinicians. Aust Occup Ther J. 2008;55(1):61–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar