Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39622021›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2024

Video Remote Sign Language Interpreting in Health Communication for Deaf People: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Minerva Rivas Velarde, Laura Catalina Izquierdo Martinez, Jyoti Dalal, Angela Martinez-R, Danna Lesley Cruz Reyes, Jess Cuculick, Alexie Vallejo-Silva, Jonathan Irreño-Sotomonte, Nora Groce

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05966623 (Assessing the Impact of Vidéo Remote Sign Language Interpreting in Healthcare), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

NCT05966623 naunknown statusnot on this map

Assessing the Impact of Vidéo Remote Sign Language Interpreting in Healthcare: Linking Disability Studies With Empirical Challenges of Public Health Research

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Geneva, SwitzerlandRan2023 to 2024Enrolled183ConditionsDeafnessArmsVideo Remote Interpretation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  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

9 authors.

Minerva Rivas VelardeSchool Of Health Science, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-3747-3306
Laura Catalina Izquierdo MartinezUniversidad del Rosario, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-5497-7082
Jyoti DalalFaculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5817-026X
Angela Martinez-RUniversidad del Rosario, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-2358-4198
Danna Lesley Cruz ReyesUniversidad del Rosario, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-5977-8162
Jess CuculickNational Technical Institute for the Deaf, Rochester, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6018-3812
Alexie Vallejo-SilvaClinica Nuestra Señora de la Paz, Bogota, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0001-5333-8329
Jonathan Irreño-SotomonteClinica Nuestra Señora de la Paz, Bogota, Colombia.ORCID 0009-0000-3362-3966
Nora GroceInstitute of Epidemiology & Health, University Collegue London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7885-7042

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current standard of interpretation provision is not efficacious or not acceptable to Deaf patients who communicate using sign language. In-person or video relay interpretation (VRI) sign language interpretation is largely unavailable. There are no clear data on the availability of VRI or in-person interpretation. Given the limited number of available sign language interpreters and the cost, VRI may be more available than in-person. Existing evidence tends to focus on assessing personal preferences of Deaf users regarding interpretation and interpreters' preferences. Although respecting preferences is essential, there is a vacuum of knowledge on how the format of access to interpretation impacts the quality of communication between Deaf persons and health personnel.

objectiveThis study aims to look at the effectiveness of the VRI system in improving communication outcomes between Deaf patients and doctors versus the available standard of care of the usual communication tools, including informal interpretation, lip- or note-reading, and using their mobile phones to contact a formal or informal interpreter, for Deaf patients aged 18 years and older in Bogota, Colombia.

methodsThis is a randomized controlled trial with a total sample size of 216 participants, divided into 2 groups: an intervention group, which receives a medical appointment using VRI, and a control group, which receives a medical appointment using standard communication. Both the Deaf participants and the health care professionals will be blinded to the allocation, as they will not know whether the appointment will involve VRI or standard communication until they arrive at the office. The primary outcome measure will be an assessment of communication using a Doctor-Patient Communication Scale. This scale was translated into Colombian Sign Language following a rigorous cultural adaptation and translation procedure. Furthermore, the database contains key clinical variables and recommendations provided by the doctor during a general medicine appointment. We will compute associations.

resultsRecruitment opened on August 24, 2023. As of July 2024, 180 participants had been enrolled. The intervention and data collection were finalized in October 2024. The findings of this study are expected to be submitted for publication in early 2025.

conclusionsThis study will provide rigorous evidence regarding information and communications technology intervention in health care, addressing empirical challenges in using inclusive research designs in public health. In addition, effective VRI models that address the challenges faced by Deaf people will be tested, implemented, and maintained in low- and middle-income countries. A disability-inclusive evaluative tool for quality communication mediated by VRI in health care is also tested. Ultimately, this will lead to evidence-based recommendations for implementing the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in mobile health contexts.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05966623; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05966623. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/64590.

Indexed as

Persons with Hearing DisabilitiesSign LanguageAdultDeafnessFemaleHealth CommunicationHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVideo Recordingassistive technologycommunicationdeafdisabilityhealthcarevideo remote interpretation

Identifiers

PMID39622021
PMCPMC11650082

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.