↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative exploration of trial-related terminology in a study involving Deaf British Sign Language users

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A qualitative exploration of trial-related terminology in a study involving Deaf British Sign Language users
Published in
Trials, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13063-016-1349-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alys Young, Rosemary Oram, Claire Dodds, Catherine Nassimi-Green, Rachel Belk, Katherine Rogers, Linda Davies, Karina Lovell

Abstract

Internationally, few clinical trials have involved Deaf people who use a signed language and none have involved BSL (British Sign Language) users. Appropriate terminology in BSL for key concepts in clinical trials that are relevant to recruitment and participant information materials, to support informed consent, do not exist. Barriers to conceptual understanding of trial participation and sources of misunderstanding relevant to the Deaf community are undocumented. A qualitative, community participatory exploration of trial terminology including conceptual understanding of 'randomisation', 'trial', 'informed choice' and 'consent' was facilitated in BSL involving 19 participants in five focus groups. Data were video-recorded and analysed in source language (BSL) using a phenomenological approach. Six necessary conditions for developing trial information to support comprehension were identified. These included: developing appropriate expressions and terminology from a community basis, rather than testing out previously derived translations from a different language; paying attention to language-specific features which support best means of expression (in the case of BSL expectations of specificity, verb directionality, handshape); bilingual influences on comprehension; deliberate orientation of information to avoid misunderstanding not just to promote accessibility; sensitivity to barriers to discussion about intelligibility of information that are cultural and social in origin, rather than linguistic; the importance of using contemporary language-in-use, rather than jargon-free or plain language, to support meaningful understanding. The study reinforces the ethical imperative to ensure trial participants who are Deaf are provided with optimum resources to understand the implications of participation and to make an informed choice. Results are relevant to the development of trial information in other signed languages as well as in spoken/written languages when participants' language use is different from the dominant language of the country.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 79 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 16%
Researcher 13 16%
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 21 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 12%
Social Sciences 10 12%
Psychology 8 10%
Linguistics 7 9%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 25 31%