Collaboration With Deaf Communities to Conduct Accessible Health Surveillance

Introduction Populations of deaf sign language users experience health disparities unmeasured by current public health surveillance. Population-specific health data are necessary to collaboratively identify health priorities and evaluate interventions. Standardized, reproducible, and language-concordant data collection in sign language is impossible via written or telephone surveys. Methods Deaf and hearing researchers, community members, and other stakeholders developed a broad computer-based health survey based on the telephone-administered Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. They translated survey items from English to sign language, evaluated the translations, and filmed the survey items for inclusion in their custom software. They initiated the second Rochester Deaf Health Survey in 2013 (n=211). Analyses (conducted in 2015) compared Rochester Deaf Health Survey 2013 findings with those of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System with the general adult population in the same community (2012, n=1,816). Results The Rochester Deaf Health Survey 2013 participants’ mean age was 44.7 (range, 18—87) years. Most were deaf since birth or early childhood (87.1%) and highly educated (53.6% with ≥4 years of college). The median household income was \u3c $35,000. The prevalence of current smokers was low (8.1%). Nearly all (93.8%) reported having health insurance, yet barriers to appropriate health care were evident, with high emergency department use (16.2% with two or more past-year visits) and 22.7% forgoing needed health care in the past year because of cost. Conclusions Community-engaged research with deaf populations identifies strengths and priorities, providing essential information otherwise missing from existing public health surveillance, and forming a foundation for collaborative dissemination to facilitate broader inclusion of deaf communities

A Comparison of Deaf/Hard of Hearing and Hearing Young Adults’ Responses to a Health Risk Behavior Survey

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Rochester. School of Nursing. Dept. of Nursing, 2010.Currently, few structured self-report instruments that may be used for collecting data from adolescents who are deaf exist for the purposes of public health surveillance or research. The development of structured self-report instruments that allow adolescents who are deaf to communicate health-related information in a manner that protects their identity or provides them with anonymity is critical to the success of conducting health-related research with this population. In order to conduct research that is essential to identifying and addressing the health needs and risks of persons deaf since childhood, investigative studies to address this critical barrier to progress in the field of Public Health Research are necessary. Quantitative health-related research (HRR) can be used to systematically identify and measure the health-related issues of early-deafened persons (EDPs) that are deemed to exist based on qualitative health research and anecdotal clinician reports. However, conducting quantitative HRR with EDPs is challenging because there are issues related to communication and language that threaten the rigor and control required of sound systematic research. To conduct sound quantitative investigations with EDPs, researchers must use measurement instruments that are determined to be valid and reliable when used with this population, and few of these instruments exist. Therefore, a first step to addressing the health-related issues of EDPs, through systematic HRR, is identifying valid and reliable instruments for use with them in quantitative health research. The purpose of this descriptive study was to examine the reliability and validity of a health risk behavior survey (HBS) designed to make health surveillance accessible to deaf young adults. Using a secondary analysis approach, the responses and response patterns of 732 deaf/hard of hearing (HOH) and hearing college students who took the HBS were examined and compared. The students’ survey responses were compared to: (a) identify any differences between students’ response patterns, and (b) explore what factors, such as hearing status or language proficiency and use, are associated with those differences. This study was an investigation of whether or not the students’ responses might have reflected differences between, the deaf/HOH and hearing young adults’ self-reported health risk behaviors or might have been attributable to other factors related taking the health survey; such as, differences in literacy skills or differences in language proficiency and use. Specifically, this study examined and compared the dispersion of students’ responses among each survey item (comparisons by hearing status and language proficiency), the consistency of students’ responses to related survey items (comparisons by hearing status and language proficiency), and the number and pattern of students “don’t know” and skipped responses (comparisons by hearing status and language proficiency). In addition, the readability of the instrument’s survey items was also examined using the Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level tests. Analysis of the students’ responses and response patterns revealed that statistically significant differences in responses and response patterns existed between the deaf/HOH and hearing young adults in this sample. Findings from this study suggest that some of these differences might reflect true differences in self-reported health risk behaviors while other differences were related to language proficiency (reading skills), health knowledge and experiences, or the readability of the HBS

International networking guidelines for nurses

Basic guidelines are necessary for international networking in nursing. This article outlines the benefits of and strategies for networking, highlights the social and behavioral considerations of social networking, and presents potential guidelines for further discourse.UCR::Vicerrectoría de Docencia::Salud::Facultad de Medicina::Escuela de Enfermerí

The Brighton Collaboration standardized template for collection of key information for benefit-risk assessment of inactivated viral vaccines

Inactivated viral vaccines have long been used in humans for diseases of global health threat and are now among the vaccines for COVID-19 under development. The Brighton Collaboration Viral Vector Vaccines Safety Working Group (V3SWG) has prepared a standardized template to describe the key considerations for the benefit-risk assessment of inactivated viral vaccines. This will help key stakeholders to assess potential safety issues and understand the benefit-risk of the vaccine platform. The standardized and structured assessment provided by the template would also help to contribute to improved communication and support public acceptance of licensed inactivated viral vaccines