Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41835950›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

AI testing, evaluation, verification and validation for accessibility: a comprehensive framework.

Gabriella Waters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Gabriella WatersCognitive and Neurodiversity AI Lab, Center for Responsible AI, Virginia State University, Baltimore, VA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As artificial intelligence (AI) systems continue to remain prevalent in society, ensuring their accessibility for all users, including those with disabilities, is of great importance. This paper presents a comprehensive framework for AI Testing, Evaluation, Verification and Validation (TEVV) focused on accessibility. The proposed methodology incorporates methods for red teaming, model testing, and field testing with a particular emphasis on usability testing for accessibility. The results demonstrate, through detailed case studies, that systematically evaluating AI systems for accessibility barriers and biases improves the inclusivity and effectiveness of AI technologies for diverse user populations. The findings suggest that this accessibility-focused TEVV framework provides a structured approach for developing more equitable and universally usable AI systems that benefit all members of society.

Indexed as

accessibility (for disabled)AI evaluationAI evaluation frameworkAI testingartificial intelligence

Identifiers

PMID41835950
PMCPMC12980396

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.