This study examines the diversity of terminologies associated with assistive technology (AT), a crucial field that promotes autonomy and inclusion for people with disabilities. Although the wide use of assistive technology is observed in the literature, a variety of terms are often used interchangeably, which hinders research, technological development, and the formulation of public policies. In this sense, this systematic review aimed to identify, categorise, and analyse the diversity of terms used to describe AT in the scientific literature, contributing to greater conceptual clarity and supporting structured and interdisciplinary development in the field. A comprehensive search was conducted in July 2024 across the Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases, covering publications from 1989 to 2024. Eligible studies were peer-reviewed journal articles in English that conceptually defined at least one AT-related term. The selection process followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines and included studies from Q1 and Q2 journals to ensure academic rigour. A total of 117 studies were included out of 11,941 initial records. Sixteen distinct terms were identified and grouped into five clusters based on semantic and functional similarities: Cluster 1—Technologies for assistance and inclusion. Cluster 2—Functional assistive devices. Cluster 3—Assistive interaction interfaces. Cluster 4—Assistive environmental technologies. Cluster 5—Assistive systems. A complementary meta-analysis revealed geographic and temporal trends, indicating that terms such as “assistive technology” and “assistive device” are globally dominant. In contrast, others, like “enabling technology,” are more context-specific and emerging. The findings contribute theoretically by providing a structured framework for understanding AT terminology and practically by supporting the design of public policy and interdisciplinary communication.

For a long time, a company’s Product Development Process (PDP) was seen as supporting the operations department, although PDP decisions and mistakes have a considerable impact on market performance. This is critical even in agriculture where bad habits and practices in the PDP can lead rural producers to great losses. Therefore, this research investigates the effect of the PDP on the market performance of rural products (bananas) in the southern region of Brazil, based on two analyses: (i) how sustainability practices support the PDP phases and (ii) how the phases of the Product Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) mediate sustainability practices and PDP phases. This study presents a quantitative analysis using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and hierarchical ordinary least squares (OLS) regression of data obtained from a survey of 110 rural producers who directly participate in the banana production and planning process in southern Brazil. Our results show that sustainability practices support the PDP, and we confirm that the product development and post-development phase has an effect on market performance. In addition, we identify that in the pre-development phase of the PDP, dealing with rural products (bananas), the maturity stage of the LCA mediates sustainability. In the PDP development phase, we conclude that rural families who develop economic and environmental practices with their products, which are in the market growth phase may have reduced results. As for the post-development phase of the PDP, we conclude that when companies invest in environmental and social practices, there is a complete mediation of the effect, where these practices lose strength if the product is in the introductory and maturity phases in the market. In an original matter, our study contributes to demonstrating the value of the product life cycle for the Product Development Process in agriculture using sustainability practices through a systemic approach, filling the gap in the literature due to a lack of integrated research on these areas seen.