What Words Do We Use to Talk About Technology That Helps?

A systematic review has focused on how scholars describe assistive technology (AT). Scanning nearly 12,000 records from 1989 to 2024, researchers selected 117 articles that defined at least one AT‑related term. Sixteen different words emerged, grouped into five macro‑clusters. The first includes expressions like “technologies for assistance and inclusion”, while the second gathers the well‑known “assistive devices”. The third cluster covers “assistive interaction interfaces”, the fourth “assistive environmental technologies”, and the fifth “assistive systems”. Meta‑analysis showed that terms such as “assistive technology” and “assistive device” dominate globally, whereas newer expressions like “enabling technology” appear in specific contexts. This terminology map is more than an academic exercise: it helps harmonise communication among researchers, engineers, and policy makers, easing the development of consistent standards and new products. In practice, a clear terminology can speed up research, improve solution design, and make public policies for inclusion more effective.

The review adhered to PRISMA 2020 guidelines, ensuring transparency in study selection and exclusion. Searches were performed on Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, filtered for peer‑reviewed English articles published in Q1‑Q2 journals. For semantic analysis, researchers employed clustering techniques based on lexical and functional similarity, combining machine‑learning algorithms with expert manual evaluations. The outcome was a five‑cluster model, each characterized by keywords, usage contexts, and application domains. Cluster 1 (technologies for assistance and inclusion) includes solutions that aim to modify the social environment, such as digital learning platforms for students with disabilities. Cluster 2 (functional devices) groups physical aids, e.g., smart prostheses or wheelchairs. Cluster 3 (interaction interfaces) covers brain‑computer interfaces and adaptive controllers. Cluster 4 (environmental technologies) refers to home‑automation systems and environmental sensors that ease daily life. Finally, Cluster 5 (assistive systems) integrates hardware and software into end‑to‑end solutions, like support robots. Temporal analysis showed a publication peak between 2015 and 2022, linked to the rise of the Internet of Things and artificial intelligence. Geographically, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan dominate scientific output, but a significant increase in contributions from emerging countries, especially in Asia and Latin America, is observed. These trends suggest that terminological standardisation can foster smoother international collaborations, reducing linguistic barriers and accelerating assistive technology adoption across diverse contexts. Moreover, a shared taxonomy can guide funding agencies in defining more targeted calls, encouraging interdisciplinary projects that blend engineering, neuroscience, and inclusive design. In summary, the terminological mapping not only clarifies the conceptual landscape but also provides an operational foundation for research, technological development, and more effective public policy formulation.