"Sympathy" vs."Empathy": Comparing experiences of I2Audits and disability simulations.

People with disability often experience stigma and discrimination, and people with disability in rural areas may experience these at higher rates. Additionally, people with disability in rural areas may have fewer opportunities for physical and social participation due to barriers in the built environment. Activities such as disability simulations and inclusive, interdisciplinary community planning workshops (i.e., I2Audits) seek to draw awareness to and address these problematic experiences. The present study used thematic analysis from qualitative research to examine the advantages and disadvantages of using disability simulations and I2Audits in rural communities. Findings suggest that disability simulations increase stigmatization, lead to feelings of embarrassment and discomfort, and do not capture the experiences of people with disability. On the other hand, I2Audits lead to meaningful environmental changes, create feelings of empowerment, and center the lived experiences of people with disability within a bio-psycho-social model of disability. Results suggest that not only can I2Audits be a powerful tool to draw attention to physical barriers that people with disability face, but they also draw attention to the multi-level changes needed to increase opportunities for participation and address sources of stigma and discrimination in rural areas.

Exploring environmental measures in disability: Using Google Earth and Street View to conduct remote assessments of access and participation in urban and rural communities.

The Americans with Disabilities Act has been in place since 1990. Yet, we still do not know the actual levels of accessibility in the nation, how access varies across communities or over time, or how it influences participation in community life. The present two studies explored the use of Google Earth (GE) and Google Street View (GSV) imagery as a database for examining the accessibility of rural and urban cities and towns in the United States. We developed procedures for selecting places in a community to observe multiple access features. Study 1 reports the findings from assessments of 25 communities across 17 states. We observed ≈50,000 m (31 miles) of pathways through the observed places. The Combined Access Score (CAS) averaged 65% across these communities. In Study 2, we evaluated 22 towns and cities in a large rural state. We observed ≈77,000 m (48 miles) of pathways through the Central Business Districts observed as core areas connecting people to community life. The CAS averaged 83.9% across these communities. We noted a Rural Access Penalty (RAP), such that rural areas tended to be less accessible, leading to less community participation. The method for using GSV to examine accessibility is discussed. This study demonstrates an inexpensive and reliable method for evaluating the accessibility of communities and participation in them. Future research should be conducted to gather a larger sample of communities in order to create a baseline from which to monitor changes in accessibility of infrastructure over time.

Improving mammography access for women with disabilities: Outcomes of the CDC's right to know campaign.

Women with disabilities share similar risks for breast cancer as other women yet experience a lack of access to cancer screening and are less likely to receive screening mammograms in accordance with recommended guidelines. The present study evaluated mammography centers across the state of Montana in response to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Right to Know campaign, which focused on addressing barriers to breast cancer screening. Mammography centers were originally evaluated in 2009 and were reassessed in 2011 and 2015 after being given action plans to address accessibility barriers. The current study examined changes in accessibility across time in four priority areas: 1) van and standard parking, 2) exterior and interior routes, 3) mammography rooms, and 4) restrooms. Results indicate all mammography centers had a least one mammography machine that lowered for patients in a seated position and that accessibility of the four priority areas improved over time; however, improvements were still needed to encourage health equity for women with disabilities.