Disparities in Usage of Assistive Technology Among People With Disabilities

Assistive Technology

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 194-203

  Kaye, H Stephen ^a   Yeager, Patricia ^b   Reed, Myisha ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b California Foundation for Independent Living Centers   (United States)

Author keywords

Assistive Technology; Disability; Disparities; Independent Living; Participatory Action Research

Indexed keywords

ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY; DISABILITY; DISPARITIES; INDEPENDENT LIVING; PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH;

SURVEYS; TECHNOLOGY;

USABILITY ENGINEERING;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES; COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH; DATA COLLECTION; DISABLED PERSONS; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS DISPARITIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PILOT PROJECTS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SELF-HELP DEVICES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 58149482071     PISSN: 10400435     EISSN: 19493614     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10400435.2008.10131946     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Agree, E.M., Freedman, V. A., & Sengupta, M. (2004). Factors influencing the use of mobility technology in community based long-term care. Journal of Aging and Health, 16, 267-307.
2. Bodine, C., & Scherer, M. J, (2006). Technology for improving cognitive function. A workshop sponsored by the US Interagency Committee on Disability Research (ICDR): Reports from working groups. Disability and Rehabil itation, 28, 1567-1571.
3. Carra squillo, O., Lantigua, R. A., & Shea, S. (2000). Differences in functional status of Hispanic versu s non-Hispanic White elders: Data from the Medical Expendi ture Panel Survey. Journal of Aging an d Health, 12, 342-36I.
4. Cutler, D. M., Landrum, M. B., & Stewart, K. A. (2006). How do the better educated do it? Socioeconomic status and the ability to cope with underlying impairment (NBER Working Paper No. WI2040). Cambridge, MA: Nation al Bureau of Economic Research.
5. Doe, T. M. (Ed.). (2004). How it works: AT narratives from California. Sacramento, CA: California Foundation for Independent Living Centers
6. Forbes, W. F., Hayward, L. M., & Agwani, N. (1993). Factors associated with self-reported use and non-use of assistive devices among impaired elderly residing in the community. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 84, 53-57.
7. Freedman, V. A., Martin, L. G., Cornman, J., Agree, E. M., & Schoeni, R. F. (2005). Trends in Assistance with Daily Activities: Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities persist in the U.S. older population (TRENDS Working Paper No. 05-2). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Center for the Demography of Aging.
8. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: AIdine.
9. Hartke, R. J., Proha ska, T. R., & Furner, S. E. (1998). Older adults and assistive devices: Use, multiple-device use, and need. Journal of Aging and Health, 10, 99-116.
10. Kaye, H. S. (2000). Compute r and internet use among people with disabilities (Disability Statistics Report No. 13). Washington, DC: LIS, Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
11. Kaye, H. S., Kang, T., & LaPlante, M. P. (2000).Mobility device use in the United States (Disability Statisti cs Report No. 14). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
12. LaPl ante, M. P., Hend ershot, G. E., & Moss, A. J, (1992).Assistive technology devices and home accessibility features: DISPARITIES IN USAGE OF ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY Prevalence, payment, need, and trends. Advance Data, 217, 1-2.
13. Resnik, I., & Allen, S. (2006). Racial and ethnic differences in use of assistive devices for mobility: Effect modification by age. Journal of Aging and Health, 18, 106-124.
14. Rubin, R.M., & White-Means, S. I. (2001). Race, disability, and assistive devices: Sociodemographic s or discrimination. International Journal of Social Economics, 28, 927-941.
15. Russell, J. N., Hendershot, G. E., LeCler e, F., Howie, I. J., & Adler, M. (1997). Trends and differential use of assistive technology devices: United States, 1994. Advance Data, 292, 1-9.
16. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J, (1998). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 158-183). Thousand Oak s, CA: Sage.
17. Tomita, M. R., Mann, W. C., Fraas, I. F., & Burns, I. I. (1997). Racial differences of frail elders in assistive technology. Assistive Technology, 9, 140-151.
18. Tomita, M. R., Mann, W. C., Fraas, L. F., & Stanton, K. M. (2004). Predictors of the use of ass istive devices th at address physical impairments among community-based frail elders, Journal of Applied Gerontology, 23, 141-155.
19. Tomita, M. R., Mann, W. C., & Welch, T. R. (2001). Use of assistive devices to address hearing impairment by older per sons with disabilities. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 24, 279-289.
20. Verbrugge, I. M., & Sevak, P. (2002). Use, type, and efficacy of assistance for disability. Journal of Gerontology B: Social Sciences, 57, S366-379.
21. Whyte, W. F. (1989). Advancing scientific knowledge through participatory action research, Sociological Forum, 4, 367-385.
22. Whyte, W. F. (Ed.). (1991). Participatory action research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
23. Whyte, W. F., Greenwood, D. J., & Lazes, P. (1989). Participatory action research: Through practice to science in social research. American Behavioral Scientist, 32, 513-551.
24. Zimmer, Z., & Chappell, N. L. (1994). Mobility restriction and the use of devices among seniors. Journal of Aging and Health, 6, 185-208.
25. Zola, I. K. (1988).The Independent Living Movement: Empowering people with disabilities. Australian Disability Review, 1, 23-27.