Research question
To what extent do selected private healthcare websites in Bangladesh meet an explicitly documented set of web accessibility criteria, and which interface problems appear repeatedly?
Proposed approach
The study would use a defined sample of publicly accessible healthcare websites, an explicit inclusion protocol, and a repeatable evaluation checklist. Automated tools could help identify candidate problems, but manual review would still be necessary.
Possible evaluation dimensions
- Document structure, labels, alternative text and navigation landmarks
- Keyboard interaction and visible focus
- Readable information, form instructions and error messages
- Representative page selection and transparent recording of findings
Evidence and limitations
Technical reviews cannot establish how real patients experience or trust a website. User testing would be a separate phase. Any findings must be documented with sampling criteria, version dates and reproducible methods. Ethical considerations and conflicts of interest must be acknowledged.
Methodological references
W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ↗
W3C WCAG-EM evaluation methodology ↗
Next steps: define sampling, complete a pilot, obtain methodological review and report results transparently. This is not a clinical or patient-outcome assessment.