New article: Systematic review on health outcomes in Deaf signing populations

by | Jun 6, 2024 | Uncategorised | 0 comments

Systematic review on health outcomes in Deaf signing populations published in PLOS ONE

A systematic review on health outcomes in Deaf signing populations by Rogers, Rowlandson, James, Shields, and Young (2024) has highlighted the inequalities in health outcomes for Deaf people. Published in PLOS ONE available to access via this link: []


Click here for Abstract in BSL


English abstract:


(i) To identify peer reviewed publications reporting the mental and/or physical health outcomes of Deaf adults who are sign language users and to synthesise evidence; (ii) If data available, to analyse how the health of the adult Deaf population compares to that of the general population; (iii) to evaluate the quality of evidence in the identified publications; (iv) to identify limitations of the current evidence base and suggest directions for future research.


Systematic review.

Data sources

Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, and Web of Science.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies

The inclusion criteria were Deaf adult populations who used a signed language, all study types, including methods-focused papers which also contain results in relation to health outcomes of Deaf signing populations. Full-text articles, published in peer-review journals were searched up to 13th June 2023, published in English or a signed language such as ASL (American Sign Language).

Data extraction

Supported by the Rayyan systematic review software, two authors independently reviewed identified publications at each screening stage (primary and secondary). A third reviewer was consulted to settle any disagreements. Comprehensive data extraction included research design, study sample, methodology, findings, and a quality assessment.


Of the 35 included studies, the majority (25 out of 35) concerned mental health outcomes. The findings from this review highlighted the inequalities in health and mental health outcomes for Deaf signing populations in comparison with the general population, gaps in the range of conditions studied in relation to Deaf people, and the poor quality of available data.


Population sample definition and consistency of standards of reporting of health outcomes for Deaf people who use sign language should be improved. Further research on health outcomes not previously reported is needed to gain better understanding of Deaf people’s state of health.