Smith, O. M. et al. Peer assessment perpetuates limitations for traditionally excluded teams. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 7, 512–523 (2023).
Liu, F., Rahwan, T. & AlShebli, B. Non-White scientists seem on fewer editorial boards, spend extra time underneath assessment, and obtain fewer citations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2215324120 (2023).
Incapacity and Well being Knowledge System (DHDS). Facilities for Illness Management and Prevention http://dhds.cdc.gov/ (2023).
Nganji, J. T. An evaluation of the accessibility of PDF variations of chosen journal articles printed in a WCAG 2.0 period (2014–2018). Study. Publ. 31, 391–401 (2018).
Wang, L. L. et al. Bettering the accessibility of scientific paperwork: present state, person wants, and a system answer to boost scientific PDF accessibility for blind and low imaginative and prescient customers. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.00076 (2021).
Campbell, A. et al. Internet Content material Accessibility Pointers (WCAG) 2.2. W3C World Huge Internet Consortium Advice. W3C www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/ (2024).
Kasdorf, B. Why accessibility is difficult and how one can make it simpler: classes from publishers. Study. Publ. 31, 11–18 (2018).
Gies, T. The ScienceDirect accessibility journey: a case research. Study. Publ. 31, 69–76 (2018).
Common design and accessibility. Basic Companies Administration www.section508.gov/develop/universal-design/ (2023).
MacDonald, M. C., Simply, M. A. & Carpenter, P. A. Working reminiscence constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity. Cogn. Psychol. 24, 56–98 (1992).
Baddeley, A. Working reminiscence and language: an outline. J. Commun. Disord. 36, 189–208 (2003).
Mason, R. A. & Simply, M. A. Lexical ambiguity in sentence comprehension. Mind Res. 1146, 115–127 (2007).
Drümmer, O. & Chang, B. PDF/UA in a Nutshell: Accessible Paperwork with PDF (Affiliation for Digital Doc Requirements e. V., 2013); https://pdfa.org/wp-content/until2016_uploads/2013/08/PDFUA-in-a-Nutshell-PDFUA.pdf
Caldwell, B., Cooper, M., Reid, L. G. & Vanderheiden, G. Internet Content material Accessibility Pointers (WCAG) 2.0. W3C www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/ (2008).
Delpero, W. T., O’Neill, H., Casson, E. & Hovis, J. Aviation-relevant epidemiology of colour imaginative and prescient deficiency. Aviat. Area Environ. Med. 76, 127–133 (2005).
Flaxman, A. D. et al. Prevalence of visible acuity loss or blindness within the US: a Bayesian meta-analysis. JAMA Ophthalmol. 139, 717–723 (2021).
Rein, D. B. et al. Imaginative and prescient impairment and blindness prevalence in the USA. Ophthalmology 128, 15–27 (2021).
Roitsch, J. & Watson, S. An outline of dyslexia: definition, traits, evaluation, identification, and intervention. Sci. J. Educ. 7, 81–86 (2019).
World Report on Assistive Know-how (World Well being Group & United Nations Kids’s Fund (UNICEF), 2022); www.who.int/teams/health-product-policy-and-standards/assistive-and-medical-technology/assistive-technology/global-report-on-assistive-technology
Smith, O. M. et al. Widespread lack of article accessibility insurance policies amongst ecology and evolution journals. figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.26980768 (2025).
How one can make an accessible doc in Microsoft Phrase. Basic Companies Administration www.section508.gov/create/documents/training-videos/ (2025).
Garnier, S. et al. viridis(Lite): colorblind-friendly colour maps for R. https://sjmgarnier.github.io/viridis/ (2024).
Making Figures Accessible v.2 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2024); https://static.primary.prod.gcms.the-infra.com/static/umbrella/document/Figures_accessibility_journals_edition_v2.2_2024.pdf?node=aef6670590405d43ef10
