ReviewJournal of deaf studies and deaf education2024
Ethics of research engagement with Deaf people. A qualitative evidence synthesis.
Review in Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dialogue matters. Exploring Deaf people's research experiences in Poland.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2026Article
- Deaf people's experience of the digital transformation of UK healthcare services: a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Deaf nursing professionals: experiences of social interaction and communication in professional practice.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2026Article
- Protocol: Strategies to Enhance Inclusion in Informed Consent Practice for People With Vision and/or Hearing Support Needs: A Systematic Review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Ethical Practices for Gaining Access for Research with Deaf Communities in South Africa: A Case of South African Sign Language.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2025Article
- Identity formation in bimodal-bilingual children of Deaf adults (Codas).Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2025Article
- Meaningful public involvement: changing research institutions toward epistemic justice.Frontiers in public health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this article, we explore ethical issues of Deaf people's engagement in research. To focus on the perspectives of Deaf people, we investigated existing qualitative and mixed methods research within a qualitative evidence synthesis. Our synthesis is based on a systematic database search (Scopus, PubMed) and reference check of included papers which resulted in 27 eligible papers. We analyzed the data using thematic synthesis and developed 5 analytical themes. The results present research as a struggle for Deaf people and emphasize the need for changes regarding recognition of Deaf research in a cross-cultural context, maintaining equal and partner relations, and provision of accessible communication. Our research contributes to understanding what the ethical inclusion of Deaf people in research implies. It may also support the development of evidence-based normative recommendations and scientific cooperation between Deaf and hearing people.
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.