Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36063244›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2022

How do face masks impact communication amongst deaf/HoH people?

Eva Gutierrez-Sigut, Veronica M Lamarche, Katherine Rowley, Emilio Ferreiro Lago, María Jesús Pardo-Guijarro, Ixone Saenz, Berta Frigola, Santiago Frigola, Delfina Aliaga, Laura Goldberg

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Eva Gutierrez-SigutDepartment of Psychology, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK. eva.gutierrez@essex.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-6569-2138
Veronica M LamarcheDepartment of Psychology, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK.
Katherine RowleyDCAL Research Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Emilio Ferreiro LagoUniversidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Cuenca, Spain.
María Jesús Pardo-GuijarroUniversidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Cuenca, Spain.
Ixone SaenzUniversity Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Berta Frigola, Barcelona, Spain.
Santiago FrigolaUniversity Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Delfina AliagaUniversity Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Laura GoldbergDepartment of Psychology, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK.
Universitat Pompeu Fabra · ESUniversity of Essex · GBUniversity of Castilla-La Mancha · ESUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Face coverings have been key in reducing the spread of COVID-19. At the same time, they have hindered interpersonal communication, particularly for those who rely on speechreading to aid communication. The available research indicated that deaf/hard of hearing (HoH) people experienced great difficulty communicating with people wearing masks and negative effects on wellbeing. Here we extended these findings by exploring which factors predict deaf/HoH people's communication difficulties, loss of information, and wellbeing. We also explored the factors predicting perceived usefulness of transparent face coverings and alternative ways of communicating. We report the findings from an accessible survey study, released in two written and three signed languages. Responses from 395 deaf/HoH UK and Spanish residents were collected online at a time when masks were mandatory. We investigated whether onset and level of deafness, knowledge of sign language, speechreading fluency, and country of residence predicted communication difficulties, wellbeing, and degree to which transparent face coverings were considered useful. Overall, deaf/HoH people and their relatives used masks most of the time despite greater communication difficulties. Late-onset deaf people were the group that experienced more difficulties in communication, and also reported lower wellbeing. However, both early- and late-onset deaf people reported missing more information and feeling more disconnected from society than HoH people. Finally, signers valued transparent face shields more positively than non-signers. The latter suggests that, while seeing the lips is positive to everyone, signers appreciate seeing the whole facial expression. Importantly, our data also revealed the importance of visual communication other than speechreading to facilitate face-to-face interactions.

Indexed as

COVID-19DeafnessCommunicationHumansMasksSign LanguageAccessibilityCommunicationCOVID-19DeafnessMasksTransparent masksWellbeing

Identifiers

PMID36063244
PMCPMC9443624
OpenAlexW4294669067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.