ArticlePLOS global public health2023
Attitudes and experiences regarding preventive strategies for the deaf population in Western New York.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- An overview of PLOS curated collection in health literacy.PloS one · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
People for whom English is a second language, such as the deaf population, often have unequal access to health information and low health literacy. In the context of a wider study on risk of tick-borne illness in deaf communities, we explored barriers, opportunities, and nuances to accessible health information and communication among deaf people. Semi-structured qualitative individual and group interviews were conducted with 40 deaf people in upstate New York, to explore factors associated with health literacy and health information accessibility. Interviews were conducted in American Sign Language (ASL) by a deaf researcher fluent in ASL. Data analysis included the translation of ASL signs into English words, systematic coding, and generation of themes. A total of 21 interview events (mean time per interview = 41 minutes) were conducted. Two main themes and multiple sub-themes emerged from the data: 1) Layers of obstacles faced by deaf people confirms (or reinforces) exclusion; and 2) preventive information is unavailable or inaccessible to deaf people. Sub- themes identified in the results were perceptions of the deaf community and deaf culture, complex layers of obstacles faced by deaf individuals, the digital divide, the culture of communication, awareness of tick and tick-borne disease (TBD) diseases, importance of using certified deaf interpreters (CDI), health information dissemination strategies and collaborations with the education system, and physical/virtual community engagement. The data suggested several challenges to health literacy in the deaf population, including healthcare and education inequalities and negative perceptions of deaf people by both deaf and hearing people. Improving health literacy in the deaf population requires more interpreters who themselves are deaf ("certified deaf interpreters"), provision of health information in ASL, and a greater engagement with the deaf population by education and healthcare systems.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.