ArticleBMC health services research2026
Deaf people's experience of the digital transformation of UK healthcare services: a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Understanding online exercise provision: a qualitative study of the perspectives of service users, instructors, and strategic leaders.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare services are being transformed with the rapid adoption of digital technology, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. However, concerns have been expressed around digital exclusion of potentially vulnerable groups such as those experiencing mental health conditions and/or sensory impairment. This study sought to explore deaf people’s experiences of the digital transformation of UK healthcare services and identify opportunities for future service improvement.
methodA qualitative study using a social constructionist approach was conducted with data collected using semi-structured interviews. Deaf participants were recruited using purposeful sampling and drawing on existing professional and community networks. Recruitment information was available in British Sign Language (BSL) and plain English formats. Interviews were video recorded, then data transcribed from sign/spoken language to text, with non-verbal and contextual data from signing and social interactions also captured using notations. Video and textual data were analysed in parallel using reflexive thematic analysis informed by the social model of disability and a published framework for evaluating the success of health technologies. Overarching themes across participants’ accounts were identified.
resultsEleven deaf people participated in the interviews. Ten participants were BSL users; one participant was non-signing and communicated in speech during the interview. Four themes were identified: (1) lack of consideration for deaf individuals’ communication preferences in digital healthcare; (2) social connections facilitate meaningful digital health inclusion; (3) problems with digital systems - flexibility, interoperability and psychological safety; and (4) models of care should optimise deaf people’s independence and accessibility. A study limitation is that data collection and analysis were completed by one researcher.
conclusionsThe findings suggest digital health technology can risk exacerbating health inequalities faced by deaf people. Opportunities for early engagement and involvement of deaf people in designing developing, implementing and evaluating digital health technologies is crucial to ensuring acceptability and services tailored to the cultural, communication, language and literacy needs of deaf communities.
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.