Figure accessibility for readers with colour vision deficiency: analysis of leading medical journals
Albany-Ward, K.; Wu, Y.
Show abstract
Colour vision deficiency (CVD) affects up to 8% of males and 0.5% of females and currently lacks effective treatments. Individuals with CVD require visually accessible environments to flourish, the absence of which can cause unacceptable disparities in academic achievement and career progression. For current and aspiring clinician-scientists with CVD, inaccessible colour figures in scientific publications can hinder understanding of key information and potentially cause patient harm. Therefore, our work characterises the accessibility of major medical journal figures for individuals with CVD using established guidelines and provides recommendations for improving figure accessibility. We observed that among 138 journal figures evaluated from nine leading medical journals, 107 (80%) failed to conform with colour contrast and labelling requirements from the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), indicating that readers with CVD may be unable to perceive displayed information. 215 of 395 (55%) sub-figures within the aforementioned figures were judged to be completely inaccessible to individuals with protan or deutan deficiencies, the commonest CVD subtypes. Despite universal publisher declarations of compliance with WCAG directives, no journals figures were fully compliant with these guidelines. Our findings demonstrate the need for urgent action by authors and publishers to augment the colour contrast of journal figures and add secondary labels to enable their comprehension by audiences with CVD. We believe that these design changes will, too, improve the clarity of figures for general audiences.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Publishing at any cost: a cross-sectional study of the amount that medical researchers spend on open-access publishing each year 93%
- One and Two Year Visual Outcomes from the Moorfields AMD Database - an Open Science Resource for the Study of Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration 91%
- Open access policies of high impact medical journals: a cross-sectional study 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Systematic Examination of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) Usage Guidelines for Scholarly Publishing in Medical Journals 93%
- Checklists to Detect Potential Predatory Biomedical Journals: A Systematic Review 90%
- Evidence of Unreliable Data and Poor Data Provenance in Clinical Prediction Model Research and Clinical Practice 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- The TARCiS statement: Guidance on terminology, application, and reporting of citation searching 89%
- Revealing the Paper Mill Iceberg: AI-Based Screening of Cancer Research Publications. 88%
- Clinical Decision Support in Cardiovascular Medicine: Effectiveness, Implementation Barriers, and Regulation 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Transparency in peer review: Exploring the content and tone of reviewers' confidential comments to editors 92%
- Knowledge and motivations of training in peer review: an international cross-sectional survey 91%
- COVID-19-related research data availability and quality according to the FAIR principles: A meta-research study 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Diversity and inclusion: A hidden additional benefit of Open Data 91%
- Artificial Intelligence's Contribution to Biomedical Literature Search: Revolutionizing or Complicating? 90%
- Detecting papilloedema as a marker of raised intracranial pressure using artificial intelligence: a systematic review 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.