Understanding dementia: effective information access from the Deaf community's perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study concerns older Deaf sign language users in the UK. Its aim was to explore how to enable effective information access and promote awareness and understanding of dementia from a culturally Deaf perspective. A purposive sample of 26 Deaf people without dementia participated in one of three focus groups facilitated directly in British Sign Language (BSL) without an intermediate interpreter. The sample was differentiated by age, role in the Deaf community, and diversity of educational attainment and professional experience. A phenomenological approach underpinned the thematic analysis of data. The findings demonstrate: (i) translation into (BSL) is a necessary but not sufficient condition to support understanding. Attention to culturally preferred means of engagement with information is vital; (ii) the content of information is best presented utilising structures and formats which cohere with Deaf people's visual cognitive strengths; and (iii) the importance of cultural values and cultural practices in raising awareness and building understanding of dementia. These include collective rather than individual responsibility for knowledge transfer and the pan-national nature of knowledge transfer among Deaf people(s). The discussion demonstrates how these specific features of effective information access and awareness building have universal implications relevant to public engagement and the promotion of general knowledge consistent with the National Dementia Strategy (England).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".