ArticlePatient education and counseling2024
Examining the differences of perceptions and experience with online health information accessibility between deaf and hearing individuals: A qualitative study.
Article in Patient education and counseling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating patients' trust in health information based on different dimensions of trust.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A qualitative study exploring access to online hearing loss information and support for adults with hearing loss.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Predictors of health literacy among Deaf American Sign Language users.Patient education and counseling · 2026Article
- Psychotherapy research in the deaf community: pilot clinical trial lessons learned.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2025Article
- Internalized oppression and deaf people's mental health.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Lived experiences of deaf parents: insights into pride, community, bilingualism, and barriers.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDescribe and compare the experiences and preferences of Deaf and hearing individuals with different levels of health literacy in accessing, interpreting, and acting upon online health information.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 17 Deaf and 10 hearing participants with high and low health literacy from three healthcare sites. We conducted thematic analysis of the transcripts to explore information navigation experiences, information sources and dissemination preferences.
resultsWe found thematic differences between Deaf and hearing participants with high and low health literacy in terms of information needs, information search experiences, information search perceptions, and preferred information dissemination approaches. Relative to hearing counterparts, Deaf participants were more likely to encounter challenges in accessing and understanding online information. Deaf participants with low health literacy were more likely to rely on visual graphics to support their understanding of the information than those with high health literacy. Deaf participants advocated for tailored approaches to disseminate health information to Deaf communities.
conclusionOur findings suggest that differences in online health information navigation experiences and accessibility may inform disparities in health literacy outcomes between Deaf and hearing individuals. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Online health information should be presented in a manner accessible to Deaf community members.
Indexed as
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.