Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The digitalization of public services has expanded access to government information and procedures, while simultaneously highlighting the need to develop interfaces accessible to individuals with varying sensory conditions. In this context, this article aims to analyze—through a literature review—the visual accessibility barriers found in mobile applications and digital public services, relating these findings to the workflow for accessing payment statements within the "Meu INSS" mobile app. The research is a qualitative literature review with a descriptive-analytical purpose, drawing upon scientific articles, literature reviews, evaluations of government applications, and regulatory documents. Priority was given to publications with verifiable bibliographic information, accessible abstracts or full texts, and a direct connection to mobile accessibility, visual impairment, digital government, or the "Meu INSS" platform. The synthesis covers studies published between 2018 and 2025, as well as relevant legal and technical documents. The findings highlight recurring issues regarding the identification of interface components, navigation, contrast, touch targets, information organization, and interaction with assistive technologies. Notable among the examined data are a systematic review that selected 60 studies from an initial pool of 932 records, another review that analyzed 49 sources on mobile accessibility evaluation, and a Brazilian study that identified accessibility issues across 22 federal government applications subjected to automated assessment. Regarding the "Meu INSS" app specifically, research on the experiences of elderly users and inclusive typography underscores the importance of service discoverability, the clarity of interface elements, and the presentation of text. It is concluded that the accessibility of digital public services must be treated as a requirement for both citizenship and quality, integrating technical criteria, user experience evaluation, and active user participation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Palhares et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: