Assistive technology for persons with profound intellectual disability: a european survey on attitudes and beliefs

References

• World Health Organization. 2001. International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health Organization. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42407
   Google Scholar
• WHO. The WHO global disability action plan 201. 4–2021. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health Organization; 2016. Available from: http://www.who.int/disabilities/actionplan/en/
   Google Scholar
• Alper S, Raharinirina S. Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: a review and synthesis of the literature. J Spec Educ Technol. 2006;21(2):47–64.
   Google Scholar
• Boot FH, Dinsmore J, Khasnabis C. Intellectual disability and assistive technology: opening the GATE wider. Front Public Health. 2017;5:10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey AC, Friedman MG, Bryen DN. Use of electronic technologies by people with intellectual disabilities. Ment Retard. 2005;43(5):322–333.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Palmer SB, Wehmeyer ML, Davies DK, et al. Family members’ reports of the technology use of family members with intellectual and developmental disabilities. J Intell Disabil Res. 2012;56(4):402–414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakken H, Vlaskamp C. A need for a taxonomy for profound intellectual and multiple disabilities. J Policy Pract Intel. 2007;4(2):83–87.
   Google Scholar
• Lancioni GE, Sigafoos J, O’Reilly MF. Assistive technology: Interventions for individuals with severe/profound and multiple disabilities. New York (NY): Springer; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Bunning K, Kwiatkowska G, Weldin N. People with profound and multiple intellectual disabilities using symbols to control a computer: exploration of user engagement and supporter facilitation. Assist Technol. 2012;24(4):259–270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cosby JE, Johnston S. Using a single-switch voice output communication aid to increase social access for children with severe disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Res Pract Severe Disabil. 2006;31:144–156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holburn S, Nguyen D, Vietze P. Computer-assisted learning for adults with profound multiple disabilities. Behav Intervent. 2004;19(1):25–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lancioni GE, O'Reilly MF, Singh NN, et al. Microswitch-based programs for persons with multiple disabilities: an overview of some recent developments. Percept Mot Skills. 2008;106(2):355–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lancioni GE, O’Reilly MF, Singh NN, et al. Persons with multiple disabilities accessing stimulation and requesting social contact via microswitch and VOCA devices: New research evaluation and social validation. Res Dev Disabil. 2009;30(5):1084–1094.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riffel LA, Wehmeyer ML, Turnbull AP, et al. Promoting independent performance of transition-related tasks using a palmtop PC-based self-directed visual and auditory prompting system. J Spec Educ Technol. 2005;20(2):5–14.
   Google Scholar
• Shih CH, Shih CT. Assisting two children with multiple disabilities and minimal motor behaviour to control environmental stimulation with thumb poke through a trackball. Behav Cogn Psychother. 2010;38(2):211–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Standen PJ, Camm C, Battersby S, et al. An evaluation of the Wii Nunchuk as an alternative assistive device for people with intellectual and physical disabilities using switch controlled software. Comp Educ. 2011;56(1):2–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tam GM, Phillips KJ, Mudford OC. Teaching individuals with profound multiple disabilities to access preferred stimuli with multiple microswitches. Res Dev Disabil. 2011;32(6):2352–2361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roche L, Sigafoos J, Lancioni GE, et al. Microswitch technology for enabling self-determined responding in children with profound and multiple disabilities: a systematic review. Augment Altern Comm. 2015;31(3):246–258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chantry J, Dunford C. How do computer assistive technologies enhance participation in childhood occupations for children with multiple and complex disabilities? A review of the current literature. Br J Occup Ther. 2010;73(8):351–365.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owuor J, Larkan F, MacLachlan M. Leaving no-one behind: using AT to enhance community living for people with intellectual disability. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;12(5):423–428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO: Assistive devices and Technologies [internet]. Geneva (Switzerland) World Health Organization; 2018 [cited 2018 Dec 16]; [about 2 screens]. Available from: http://www.who.int/disabilities/technology/en/
   Google Scholar
• Alborz A, Mcnally R, Glendinning C. Access to health care for people with learning disabilities in the UK: mapping the issues and reviewing the evidence. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(3):173–182.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boot FH, Owuor J, Dinsmore J, et al. Access to assistive technology for people with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review to identify barriers and facilitators. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2018;62(10):900–921.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ertmer PA. Addressing first- and second- order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. ETR&D-Educ Tech res. 1999;47(4):47–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsons S, Daniels H, Porter J, et al. Resources, staff beliefs and organizational culture: factors in the use of information and communication technology for adults with intellectual disabilities. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2008;21:19–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoppestad BS. Current perspective regarding adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities accessing computer technology. Disabil Rehabil: Assistive Technol. 2013;8(3):190–194.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Copley J, Ziviani J. Barriers to the use of AT for children with multiple disabilities. Occup Ther Int. 2004;11(4):229–243.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wehmeyer ML, Palmer SB, Smith SJ, et al. The efficacy of technology use by people with intellectual disability: a single-subject design meta-analysis. J Spec Educ Technol. 2008;23(3):21–30.
   Google Scholar
• Alkahtani KD. Teachers’ knowledge and use of assistive technology for students with special educational needs. J Stud Educ. 2013;3(2):65–86.
   Google Scholar
• Ashton T, Lee Y, Vega LA. Assistive technology: Perceived knowledge, attitudes, and challenges of AT use in special education. J Spec Educ Technol. 2005;20(2):60–63.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox JM, Guimond A, Campbell PH, et al. Provider perspectives on the use of assistive technology for infants and toddlers with disabilities. Top Early Child Spec. 2006;26(1):33–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mumtaz S. Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. J Inform Tech Teach Educ. 2000;9(3):319–342.
   Google Scholar
• Buckingham A, Saunders P. The survey methods workbook: From design to analysis (Reprint ed.). Cambridge (UK): Polity Press; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Carlson D, Ehrlich N. AT and information technology use and need by persons with disabilities in the United States, 2001. Maryland (United States): US Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; 2016. Available from: https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/at-use/at-use-2001.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission. Survey of Assistive Technology Users’ Needs in Massachusetts. Massachusetts (United States): 2006. Available from: http://www.massmatch.org/documents/ATSurvey-1107.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Seok S, DaCosta B. Development and standardization of an AT questionnaire using factor analyses: eight factors consisting of 67 items related to AT practices. Assist Technol. 2014;26(1):1–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wehmeyer ML. AT and students with mental retardation: Utilization and barriers. J Spec Educ Technol. 1999;14(1):48–58.
   Google Scholar
• Thurstone LL. Attitudes can be measured. Am J Sociol. 1928;33(4):529–554.
   Google Scholar
• Klockars AJ, Sax G. Multiple comparisons Sage University paper series on quantitative applications in the social sciences. Newbury Park (CA): Sage; 1986.
   Google Scholar