Patient education and counseling · 2025
Predictors of health literacy among Deaf American Sign Language users.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
McKee Michael M, Plegue Melissa, Champlin Sara, Hill Joseph, Panko Tiffany, Buis Lorraine R, Sen Ananda, Paasche-Orlow Michael K, Hauser Peter C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Health literacy is an important predictor of individuals' health, medical adherence, and health-related decision making. This study investigated the predictors of health literacy among Deaf American Sign Language (ASL) users.
METHODS: 408 Deaf ASL users and 445 Hearing English speakers were administered the Newest Vital Sign, a measure of health literacy available in both English and ASL, along with assessments of language proficiency and reading skills.
RESULTS: Deaf participants had 3.7 times greater odds of inadequate health literacy (95 % CI: 2.7, 4.9) compared to their hearing counterparts. Binary logistic regression revealed that Deaf participants' ASL proficiency and English reading grade equivalent explained 34.2 % (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance in health literacy, χ2(2) = 101.520, p < .001. Among hearing participants, by contrast, English proficiency and English reading grade equivalent explained 47.8 % of the variance in health literacy, χ2(2) = 171.071, p < .001.
CONCLUSIONS: Deaf people are at risk for having greater difficulty to find, understand, and use information and services to inform health-related decisions and actions for themselves and others.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Health professionals and health systems should allocate resources to mitigate health literacy barriers among Deaf people and make health information more available in ASL.
METHODS: 408 Deaf ASL users and 445 Hearing English speakers were administered the Newest Vital Sign, a measure of health literacy available in both English and ASL, along with assessments of language proficiency and reading skills.
RESULTS: Deaf participants had 3.7 times greater odds of inadequate health literacy (95 % CI: 2.7, 4.9) compared to their hearing counterparts. Binary logistic regression revealed that Deaf participants' ASL proficiency and English reading grade equivalent explained 34.2 % (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance in health literacy, χ2(2) = 101.520, p < .001. Among hearing participants, by contrast, English proficiency and English reading grade equivalent explained 47.8 % of the variance in health literacy, χ2(2) = 171.071, p < .001.
CONCLUSIONS: Deaf people are at risk for having greater difficulty to find, understand, and use information and services to inform health-related decisions and actions for themselves and others.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Health professionals and health systems should allocate resources to mitigate health literacy barriers among Deaf people and make health information more available in ASL.