Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41955542›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2026

Innovations in Deaf Health Care Communication: Systematic Review of Sign Language Recognition Systems.

Milena Soriano Marcolino, Lucca Fagundes Ramos de Oliveira, Lucas Rocha Valle, Luiza Marinho Motta Santa Rosa, Gabriela Teodora de Souza Sanches, Natalia Sales Santos, Michelle Ralil da Costa, Elidea Lucia Almeida Bernardino, Raniere Alislan Almeida Cordeiro, Raquel Oliveira Prates and 2 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

12 authors.

Milena Soriano MarcolinoMedical School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4278-3771
Lucca Fagundes Ramos de OliveiraTelehealth Center, University Hospital, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Avenida Professor Alfredo Balena, 190, Santa Efigênia, Belo Horizonte, CEP 30130-100, Brazil, +55 31 3307 9201.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2248-1218
Lucas Rocha ValleMedical School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0676-8657
Luiza Marinho Motta Santa RosaTelehealth Center, University Hospital, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Avenida Professor Alfredo Balena, 190, Santa Efigênia, Belo Horizonte, CEP 30130-100, Brazil, +55 31 3307 9201.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4741-4871
Gabriela Teodora de Souza SanchesMedical School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8878-7925
Natalia Sales SantosDepartment of Computer Science, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6037-1378
Michelle Ralil da CostaInstitute for Health Technology Assessment, Porto Alegre, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4990-0627
Elidea Lucia Almeida BernardinoFaculty of Arts and Sciences, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3718-9631
Raniere Alislan Almeida CordeiroFaculty of Arts and Sciences, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-5588-6023
Raquel Oliveira PratesDepartment of Computer Science, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7128-4974
Zilma Silveira Nogueira ReisMedical School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6374-9295
Mario Fernando Montenegro CamposDepartment of Computer Science, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8336-9190

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Deaf individuals often face communication challenges when interacting with those who can hear. Within health care settings, these challenges may pose risks to their safety, potentially resulting in misdiagnoses, treatment errors, and decreased quality of care. Objective: This study aims to systematically review the evidence on communication systems reported in the literature that use human-computer interaction techniques to support communication between deaf individuals who use sign language and hearing health professionals in health care settings. The review focuses on systems that are either currently in use or proposed for use in health care and that have been tested using human participants or videos of human users. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed via MEDLINE, Web of Science, ACM, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and Google Scholar in March 2025. The inclusion criteria comprised studies developing a sign language recognition system within a health care context and testing with human users. Eligible studies underwent screening by 2 independent investigators (LRV and LMMSR or LFRdO and GTdSS), with any disagreements resolved by a senior researcher (MSM). Results: The search retrieved 21,778 publications, and screening of reference lists identified 2 additional studies, resulting in a total of 23 studies meeting the eligibility criteria. Most systems (15/23, 65.2%) were image-based, while 34.8% (8/23) relied on sensors (glove-based or depth-sensing). Applications varied across health care settings, including general hospital care (10/23, 43.5%), emergencies (8/23, 34.8%), and primary care (4/23, 17.4%). All systems were in the development and testing stage, with no data on security and psychological impacts. Accuracy ranged from 25% to 100% for image-based and 72% to 99.7% for sensor-based systems. Bidirectionality and facial expression recognition, crucial for effective communication, were largely overlooked. Conclusions: Image-based systems were more common than sensor-based ones, though both showed wide variability in accuracy in recognizing and interpreting signs. Most systems failed to address critical aspects such as bidirectional communication and the recognition of facial expressions, essential for effective communication. None fully addresses the requirements for integration into health care settings. These findings highlight the need for further research on implementation, usability, and impact on the quality of care for deaf patients.

Indexed as

CommunicationDeafnessPersons with Hearing DisabilitiesSign LanguageDelivery of Health CareHumansartificial intelligencebiomedical technologycommunication barrierscomputer neural networkdeafnessgestureshearing lossPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-AnalysesPRISMAsign language

Identifiers

PMID41955542
PMCPMC13065231

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.