A systematic review of public transport accessibility for people using mobility devices

References

• World Health Organisation. World Report on Disability. Geneva: World Health Organisation (WHO); 2011. Available from: https://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Steinfeld A. Steinfeld E. The importance of of public transport. In: Steinfelf A, Maisel JL, Steinfeld E, editors. Accessible public transportation. New York: Routelage; 2018. p. 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Office of Fair Trading. Mobility Aids: An office of Fair Trading market study (OFT1374). London: UK Government; 2011. Available from: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130301185841/http:/www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/market-studies/oft1374
   Google Scholar
• LaPlante MP, Kaye HS. Demographics and trends in wheeled mobility equipment use and accessibility in the community. Assist Technol. 2010;22:3–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arp Fallow M, Jorgensen A, Knudsen LB. Mobile forms of belonging. Mobilities. 2013;8:467–486.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saltes N. Navigating disabling spaces: challenging ontological norms and the spatialization of difference through ‘Embodied Practices of Mobility’. Mobilities. 2018;13:81–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Currie G, Stanley J, Stanley J. No way to go: transport and social disadvantage in Australian Communities. Australia; 2008. Available from: http://books.publishing.monash.edu/apps/bookworm/view/No+Way+To+Go%3A+Transport+and+Social+Disadvantage+in+Australian+Communities/133/xhtml/section01.html
   Google Scholar
• Pyer T, Tucker F. ‘With us, we, like, physiclly can’t’: transport, mobility and the leisure experiences of teenage wheelchair users. Mobilities. 2017;12:36–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krane D, Hanson KW. Harris survey of Americans with disabilities. New York: National Organization on Disability; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• ABS. Transport. In: Statistics Australian Bureau of Statistics, editor. Australia; 2011. Available from: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/4446.0main+features122009
   Google Scholar
• Unsworth CA, Rawat V, Sullivan J, et al. “I’m very visible but seldom seen”: consumer choice and use of mobility aids on public transport. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2019;14:122–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavery I, Davey S, Woodside A, et al. The vital role of street design and management in reducing barriers to older peoples' mobility. Landscape Urban Plan. 1996;35:181–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cass N, Shove E, Urry J. Social exclusion, mobility and access. Sociol Rev. 2005;53:539–555.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyons G. The introduction of social exclusion into the field of travel behaviour. Transport Policy. 2003;10:339–342.
   Google Scholar
• Priya T, Uteng A. Dynamics of transport and social exclusion: effects of expensive driver’s license. Transport Policy. 2009;16:130–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bath J, Wakerman J. Impact of community participation in primary health care: what is the evidence? Aust J Prim Health. 2015;21:2–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasgow N, Blakely RM. Older nonmetropolitan residents' evaluations of their transportation arrangements. J Appl Gerontol. 2000;19:95–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaves ES, Cooper RA, Collins DM, et al. Review of the use of physical restraints and lap belts with wheelchair users. Assist Technol. 2007;19:94–107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA): the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belcher MJH, Frank AO. Survey of the use of transport by recipients of a regional Electric Indoor/Outdoor Powered (EPIOC) wheelchair service. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26:563–575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraayenoord CV. Editorial: moving about. Int J Disabil Dev Educ. 2004;51:3.
   Google Scholar
• Broome K, Mckenna K, Fleming J, et al. Bus use and older people: a literature review applying the Person-Environment-Occupation model in macro practice. Scand J Occup Ther. 2009;16:3–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iwarsson S, Stahl A. Accessibility, usability and universal design-positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships. Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25:57–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iwarsson S, Jensen G, Ståhl A. Travel chain enabler: development of a pilot instrument for assessment of urban public bus transport accessibility. TAD. 2000;12:3–12.
   Google Scholar
• Bromley RD, Matthews DL, Thomas CJ. City centre accessibility for wheelchair users: the consumer perspective and the planning implications. Cities. 2007;24:229–241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards K, McCluskey A. A survey of adult power wheelchair and scooter users. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2010;5:411–419.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Huang DL, Rosenberg DE, Simonovich SD, et al. Food access patterns and barriers among midlife and older adults with mobility disabilities. J Aging Res. 2012;2012:1.
   Google Scholar
• Morales R, Somolinos JA, Cerrada JA. Dynamic model of a stair-climbing mobility system and its experimental validation. Multibody Syst Dyn. 2012;28:349–367.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neven A, Braekers K, Declercq K, et al. Assessing the impact of different policy decisions on the resource requirements of a Demand Responsive Transport system for persons with disabilities. Transport Policy. 2015;44:48–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palisano RJ, Shimmell LJ, Stewart D, et al. Mobility experiences of adolescents with cerebral palsy. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2009;29:133–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pourhassana R, Rafieea R, Pourhasana M. Design of a novel mechanism for transportation of wheelchair and disabled people into public buses. Aust J Basic Appl Sci. 2011;5:866–874.
   Google Scholar
• Ureta S. Policy assemblages: proposing an alternative conceptual framework to study public action. Policy Stud Uk. 2014;35:303–318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aarhaug J, Elvebakk B. The impact of Universally accessible public transport-a before and after study. Transport Policy. 2015;44:143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almada JF, Renner JS. Public transport accessibility for wheelchair users: a perspective from macro-ergonomic design. Work. 2015;50:531–541.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bertocci G, Frost K, Smalley C. Public transit bus ramp slopes measured in situ. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2016;11:133–138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertocci G, Smalley C, Page A, et al. Manual wheelchair propulsion on ramp slopes encountered when boarding public transit buses. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2019;14:561–565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bharathy A, D’Souza C. Revisiting clear floor area requirement for wheeled mobility device users in public transportation. Transportation Res Rec. 2018;2672:675–685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson G. Travelling by urban public transport: exploration of usability problems in a travel chain perspective. Scand J Occup Ther. 2004;11:78–89.
   Google Scholar
• D'Souza C, Paquet V, Lenker JA, et al. Effects of transit bus interior configuration on performance of wheeled mobility users during simulated boarding and disembarking. Appl Ergon. 2017;62:94–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D'Souza C, Paquet V, Lenker JA, et al. Self-reported difficulty and preferences of wheeled mobility device users for simulated low-floor bus boarding, interior circulation and disembarking. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2019;14:109–121.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D'Souza C, Paquet V, Lenker J, et al. Low-floor bus design preferences of walking aid users during simulated boarding and alighting. Work. 2012;41:4951–4956.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• D'Souza C, Steinfeld E, Paquet V, et al. Space requirements for wheeled mobility devices in public transportation analysis of clear floor space requirements. Transportation Res Rec. 2010;2145:66–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frost KL, Bertocci G, Smalley C. Ramp-related incidents involving wheeled mobility device users during transit bus boarding/alighting. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:928–933.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frost K, Bertocci G, Sison S. Ingress/egress incidents involving wheelchair users in a fixed-route public transit environment. J Public Trans. 2010;13:41–62.
   Google Scholar
• Hwangbo H, Kim J, Kim S, et al. Towards universal design in public transportation systems: an analysis of low-floor bus passenger behaviour with video observation. Hum Factors Man. 2015;25:183–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IkaputraSholihah AB. Mobility for all. IATSS Res. 2001;25:23–31.
   Google Scholar
• Lenker J, Damle U, D’Souza C, et al. Usability evaluation of access ramps in transit buses: preliminary findings. J Public Trans. 2016;19:109–127.
   Google Scholar
• Mather A, Hunter-Zaworski KM. Investigation of wheeled mobility device orientation and movement on streetcars and light rail vehicles during normal and emergency braking. J Public Trans. 2016;19:93–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May E, Garrett R, Ballantyne A. Being mobile: electric mobility-scooters and their use by older people. Ageing Soc. 2010;30:1219–1237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park K, Chowdhury S. Investigating the barriers in a typical journey by public transport users with disabilities. J Transp Health. 2018;10:361–368.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petzall J. The design of entrances of taxis for elderly and disabled passengers: an experimental study. Appl Ergon. 1995;26:343–352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petzall J. Traversing step obstacles with manual wheelchairs. Appl Ergon. 1996;27:327–341.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Velho R, Holloway C, Symonds A, et al. The effect of transport accessibility on the social inclusion of wheelchair users: a mixed method analysis. SI. 2016;4:24.
   Google Scholar
• Velho R. Transport accessibility for wheelchair users: a qualitative analysis of inclusion and health. Int J Transp Sci Technol. 2019;8:103–115.
   Google Scholar
• Wretstrand A, Ståhl A, Petzäll J. Wheelchair users and public transit: eliciting ascriptions of comfort and safety. TAD. 2008;20:37–48.
   Google Scholar
• Pluye P, Gagnon MP, Griffiths F, et al. A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in mixed studies reviews. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46:529–546.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NICE. Methods for development of NICE public guidance. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2006. Available from: www.nice.org.uk
   Google Scholar
• Townsend KA, Unsworth CA. Inter-rater reliability, agreement and construct validity of the Powered Mobility Device Assessment Training Tool (PoMoDATT). Aust Occup Ther J. 2019;66:393–400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unsworth CA, Chua J, Naweed A, et al. Use of 3D scanning technology to determine bus access for people using powered mobility aids. J Transp Health. 2018;10:350–360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations. General Assembly Session 61 Resolution 106. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities A/RES/61/106; 2006 Dec 13. Retrieved 1 October 2019.
   Google Scholar