Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37082090›Full record

ReviewPostepy psychiatrii neurologii2022

Assessment of psychotic disorders among prelingually deaf individuals.

Małgorzata J Juraś

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Postepy psychiatrii neurologii, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Małgorzata J JuraśInstitute of Psychology, University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2490-5133

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This review discusses the assessment of psychotic disorders in prelingually deaf patients and the related challenges. Views: Although prelingually deaf patients are often diagnosed with psychotic disorders, the clinical presentation of this group is complex and no clear guidelines regarding the assessment process can be formulated due to the lack of valid, reliable research. Sign language dynamics or language dysfluency may be falsely recognized as disorganized thinking. Some of the symptoms indicating disorganized thinking in the case of spoken languages may fulfill specific functions when used in sign language (for example object chaining). Furthermore, deaf individuals experience multiple stressors that may be considered as risk factors for developing delusions, especially for those growing up in hearing, non-signing families. Nevertheless, it is important to acknowledge that some seemingly delusional beliefs shared by prelingually deaf people may be associated with the lack of assisted learning, gullibility, low level of confidence in healthcare or deaf communities' social norms. The question concerning the sensory modality of hallucinations experienced by deaf individuals remains unresolved. Patients' accounts suggest that hallucinations described as auditory may be perceived as lip-reading without identifying the speaker's face, among others. However, for those who provide help it is far more important to recognize the function of hallucinations and to differentiate them from normative experience. Conclusions: It is essential to expand our knowledge regarding the clinical presentation of psychotic disorders in deaf individuals in order to develop assessment guidelines and tools and, above all, increase the well-being of those suffering from psychotic disorders, as well as of those whose diagnosis remains unclear.

Indexed as

delusionshallucinationslanguage dysfluencyprelingual deafnesspsychosis

Identifiers

PMID37082090
PMCPMC9881577

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.