Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40009582›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2025

What are Deaf sign language users' experiences as patients in healthcare services? A scoping review.

Katherine D Rogers, Karina Lovell, Peter Bower, Christopher J Armitage, Alys Young

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Through deaf eyes: factors influencing suicidal behavior among deaf adults.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2026
    Article
  3. Health literacy of the Deaf community: a scoping review.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 2026
    Article
  4. Communication barriers for d/Deaf people with cancer: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors.

Katherine D RogersDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0458-5715
Karina LovellDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Peter BowerDivision of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Christopher J ArmitageManchester Centre for Health Psychology, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2365-1765
Alys YoungDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeaf people who use a signed language experience poorer physical and mental health outcomes and inequalities in access and delivery of health services.

objectivesA scoping review was conducted to identify and synthesise current knowledge on the perspectives of Deaf people and their experience of healthcare. SEARCH STRATEGY: Databases PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL were used for this review. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Any studies internationally of any design that involve Deaf signing populations that reported on patient experience within healthcare settings from a Deaf perspective were included in the review. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The abstract, title, and initial screening was followed by full text screening completed by two screeners independently. The extracted data included descriptive data and study findings. The Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT) was applied, and findings were summarised using narrative synthesis. MAIN

resultsAcross the 51 included papers, problems with language, communication and interaction featured prominently. Failure to meet Deaf people's needs has adverse impacts; examples of these include negative emotional state, disempowerment through lack of knowledge, and lack of confidence in healthcare systems. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsThe review uniquely focused on data generated from Deaf people regarding their experience, rather than third party commentary. It confirmed a less than optimal Deaf patient experience, clinical impacts of poor experience, and negative patient and healthcare systems outcomes. This supports the case for a reliable and valid measure in a signed language to capture Deaf patients' experience in healthcare.

Identifiers

PMID40009582
PMCPMC11864532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.