Accessibility of Digital Financial Applications for People With Visual Impairment: Scoping Review

Abstract

Background: Routine financial activities are now conducted primarily through digital channels. Many such systems remain inaccessible to more than 2.2 billion people globally living with vision impairment, limiting independent financial management. Constrained access can create financial strain and social disadvantage, reducing access to health-enabling resources, and contributing to avoidable health inequities. Objective: This scoping review maps evidence on the accessibility of digital financial services for individuals with visual impairment (VI) as a digital determinant of health. We synthesized barriers and facilitators, characterized study designs, settings, and populations, and identified evidence gaps to inform inclusive design, digital health research priorities, and policy. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework and reported in line with PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Eight databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Business Source Complete, ProQuest, and IEEE Xplore) were searched for peer-reviewed papers in English published between 1995 and 2026. Searches featured controlled vocabulary and free-text terms structured in 3 conceptual blocks (VI, digital financial services, and accessibility or usability). A random sample of 20% of titles, abstracts, full texts, and included studies was independently screened or charted by 2 reviewers to calibrate decisions; the remainder were screened and charted by a single reviewer. Data were charted using a standardized extraction form, and results were synthesized descriptively and thematically. Results: Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies were conducted across 12 countries, with the largest number from India (n=7), Indonesia (n=2), Thailand (n=2), and the United States (n=2). Study designs included qualitative studies (n=6), mixed methods studies (n=1), cross-sectional studies (n=4), nonrandomized experimental studies (n=2), and technical or design-focused evaluations (n=6). One study was a large population survey (n=19,136), and the remaining studies with human participants had sample sizes ranging from 4 to 36 participants. Accessibility barriers were reported across all platform types, with authentication-related barriers described in 18 studies and screen reader incompatibility in 17 studies. Reported barriers included reliance on sighted assistance for tasks such as login, verification, and payments, compromising privacy and independence. Facilitators included assistive technology support, logical navigation order, nonvisual feedback mechanisms, and accessible authentication alternatives. Evidence mapping revealed recurrent barrier patterns across Android, iOS, and web platforms. No longitudinal or intervention-based evaluations were identified. Conclusions: This review provides a focused synthesis of accessibility evidence at the intersection of digital financial services and VI, a domain addressed by neither prior digital accessibility reviews nor financial inclusion for people with disabilities. Authentication methods, interface labeling, and navigation were identified as persistent cross-platform accessibility barriers. The findings carry implications for financial technology developers, accessibility auditors, and policymakers implementing accessibility legislation and extend the digital determinants of health framework by demonstrating how inaccessible financial technology may compound health inequities.