Pautas, métodos y herramientas de evaluación de la accesibilidad web:
análisis bibliométrico y revisión bibliográfica
Palavras-chave:
Accesibilidad online, Consorcio World Wide Web, Discapacidad, Pautas de accesibilidad para el contenido web, Producción científicaResumo
El objetivo de este estudio es presentar un análisis bibliométrico sobre las pautas, métodos, técnicas y herramientas automáticas para la evaluación de la accesibilidad web en la producción científica indexada en Web of Science y Scopus. Para establecer una aproximación sobre la evolución y características generales de la producción científica sobre este tema, se analizó la totalidad de los registros incluidos en la colección principal de Web of Science y Scopus hasta el año 2024, un total de 403 registros, teniendo en cuenta indicadores de productividad, indicadores de visibilidad e impacto, y colaboración. Además, se analizaron los resúmenes, títulos y palabras clave de los autores. Los principales resultados muestran que los métodos de evaluación de la accesibilidad web contemplan la necesidad de combinar inspección manual y herramientas de evaluación automática. Sin embargo, el método más utilizado ha sido el empleo de herramientas automáticas. Los resultados también muestran un alto porcentaje en la difusión de la producción científica sobre el tema en eventos académicos y científicos, bajo la autoría e instituciones académicas principalmente de Estados Unidos, España y Reino Unido, y editoriales de Estados Unidos. Estos resultados muestran el creciente interés en torno a un tema de investigación relativamente nuevo y centrado en un área geográfica con un papel destacado en el estudio de esta disciplina a nivel científico.
Downloads
Referências
Acosta, T. et al. Accessibility of eGovernment Services in Latin America. In: International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment, 4., 2018, Ambato. Proceedings [...]. Ambato: IEEE, 2018. p. 67-74.
Acosta-Vargas, P. et al. Improving web accessibility: Evaluation and analysis of a telerehabilitation platform for hip arthroplasty patients. In: Nunes, I. (ed.). Advances in human factors and systems interaction. AHFE 2019. Cham: Springer, 2020 (Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, v. 959). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20040-4_46.
Badzio, B. et al. Analysis of the usability and accessibility of websites in view of their universal design principles. ACS, v. 18, n. 3, p. 63-85, 2022. Doi: https://doi.org/10.35784/acs-2022-22.
Clegg-Vinell, R.; Bailey, C.; Gkatzidou, V. Investigating the appropriateness and relevance of mobile web accessibility guidelines. In: W4A ‘14: International Web for All Conference, 2014, Seoul. Proceedings [...]. Seoul: ACM, 2014. p. 1-4.
Delgado López-Cózar, E.; Repiso, R. The impact of communication journals: comparing Google Scholar Metrics, Web of Science and Scopus. Comunicar, v. 21, n. 41, p. 45-52, 2013. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3916/C41-2013-04.
Granda-Orive, J.I. et al. Some advantages of Scopus over Web of Science in a bibliometric analysis on smoking. Spanish J. of Scientific Documentation, v. 36, n. 2, p. 1-9, 2013. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2013.2.941.
Guallar, J. et al. Spanish journals of Documentation in Web of Science: bibliometric analysis and thematic evolution from 2015 to 2019. EPI, v. 29, n. 6, p. 1-27, 2020. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.nov.06.
Hambley, A. et al. Web structure derived clustering for optimized web accessibility evaluation. In: WWW ‘23: The ACM Web Conference, 2023, Texas. Proceedings [...]. Texas: ACM, 2023. p. 1345-1354.
Hassanzadeh, M.; Navidi, F. Web site accessibility evaluation methods in action: A comparative approach for ministerial web sites in Iran. The Electronic Library, v. 28 n. 6, p. 789-803, 2010. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471011093499.
Hernández-González, V. et al. Comparison between Web of Science and Scopus: Bibliometric study of anatomy and morphology journals. International Journal of Morphology, v. 34, n. 4, p. 1369-1377, 2016. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022016000400032.
Kollotzek, G. et al. Comparison of manual evaluation methods for assessing the accessibility of websites based on EN 301 549. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Research and Applications, 10., 2021, Malta. Proceedings [...]. Malta: INSTICC, 2021. p. 24-35.
Kous, K. et al. Investigation of the accessibility of non-text content published on websites. In: International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (MIPRO), 43., 2020, Opatija. Proceedings [...]. Opatija: IEEE, 2020. P. 1645-1650.
Londoño-Rojas, L.F. et al. AET tool for hybrid accessibility evaluation. Universal Access in the Information Society, v. 22, n. 2, p. 655-661, 2023. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-021-00846-8.
Nietzio, A. et al. (2008). The Unified Web Evaluation Methodology (UWEM) 1.2 for WCAG 1.0. In: Miesenberger, K. et al. (ed.) Computers Helping People with Special Needs. ICCHP 2008. Berlin: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70540-6_57.
Pérez-Escoda, A. WoS and Scopus: the great partners of every researcher. Comunicar, v. 9, n. 1, p. 1-12, 2017. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3916/escuela-de-autores-031
Power, C. et al. Guidelines are only half of the story: Accessibility problems encountered by blind users on the Web. In: CHI ‘12: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2012, Austin. Proceedings [...]. Austin: ACM, 2012. p. 433-442.
Pritchard, A. Statistical bibliography or Bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation, v. 25, n. 4, p. 348-369, 1969.
Raia, M.L. et al. The educational computational thinking game with accessibility for hearing-impaired children. In: Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), 18., 2023, Aveiro. Proceedings [...]. Aveiro, 2023. p. 1-6.
Revilla Muñoz, O.; Carreras Montoto, O. WCAG 2 made easy. Madrid: Itakora Press, 2024.
Salazar-Botello, C.M. et al. Evolution of service learning: a bibliometric analysis from the Web of Science. Libraries Journal Annual of Research, v. 19, n. 1, p. 17-13, 2023
Sarita, K. et al. Accessibility of healthcare sites: Evaluation by automated tools. In: Saraswat, M. et al. (ed.). Proceedings of International Conference on Data Science and Applications: ICDSA 2021. Singapore: Springer, 2021. p. 625-636 (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, v. 287). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5348-3_50.
Takagi, H. et al. Accessibility designer: Visualizing usability for the blind. In: International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, 6., 2004, Atlanta. Proceedings [...]. Atlanta: ACM, 2004. p. 177-184.
Vigo, M. et al. Benchmarking web accessibility evaluation tools: Measuring the harm of sole reliance on automated tests. In: W4A ‘13: International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility, 2013, Rio de Janeiro. Proceedings [...]. Rio de Janeiro: Web4All Conference, 2013. p. 1-10.
Web Accessibility Initiative (W3C). Evaluating Web Accessibility overview. [S. l.]: Word Wide Web Consortium, 2023. Available from: https://www.w3.org/WAI/test-evaluate/es/. Cited: 2024 Nov. 18.
Web Accessibility Initiative (W3C). Making the Web Accessible: Strategies, standards, and supporting resources to help you make the Web more accessible to people with disabilities. [S. l.]: World Wide Web Consortium, 2024a. Available from: https://www.w3.org/WAI/. Cited: 2024 Nov. 18.
Web Accessibility Initiative (W3C). W3C Accessibility Standards overview. [S. l.]: World Wide Web Consortium, 2024b. Available from: https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/. Cited: 2024 Nov. 18.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2025 Transinformação
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
