Table 2 Details of the data

Demographic representation

Participants

Visually impaired individuals from urban, suburban, and rural areas

150 (50 urban, 50 suburban, 50 rural)

Age distribution

18–35 years: 30%; 36–55 years: 40%; 56 + years: 30%

Gender ratio

Male: 55%; Female: 45%

Mobility levels

Moderate impairment: 60%; Severe impairment: 40%

Key informants

Architects: 10; Occupational therapists: 5; Interior designers: 5; Accessibility advocates: 5

25 experts

Family members

Family members of visually impaired individuals

20 participants

Policy review

Policies reviewed

International guidelines (ISO 21542:2011, ADA) and national/local building codes

10 international; 15 national/local

Focus areas

Tactile materials: 40%; Wayfinding techniques: 30%; Lighting and contrast: 20%; Safety features: 10%

Key findings

Policies lacking tactile provisions: 75%; Inadequate lighting provisions: 60%

Accessibility challenges

Mobility statistics

Collisions with furniture: 40%; Falls due to poor lighting: 30%; Issues with floor textures: 20%

Lighting

Optimized lighting reduced navigation errors by 25%; Matte finishes reduced glare discomfort by 40%

Key informant interviews

Key themes

Tactile wayfinding: 80%; Contrasting colors for switches/controls: 70%; Adjustable task lighting: 60%

Time Spent

Average interview length: 45 min; Total transcribed data: 25,000 words

Observational assessments

Homes visited

Accessible homes assessed

20 homes

Key findings

Tactile flooring: 50%; Lacked auditory cues: 70%; Relied on natural lighting without glare control: 90%

Design recommendations

Wayfinding

Tactile paths increased navigation efficiency: 30%; Aromatic markers improved spatial recognition: 20%

Lighting

Homogeneous lighting reduced shadow areas: 50%; Adjustable task lights decreased accidents: 15%

Acoustics

Acoustic panels reduced noise: 35%, aiding sound-based navigation

Limitations

Sample size

Visually impaired individuals + key informants

170 participants