Understanding the Potential of Mental Health Apps to Address Mental Health Needs of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Community: Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mental health concerns are a significant issue among the deaf and hard of hearing (D/HH) community, but community members can face several unique challenges to accessing appropriate resources. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the mental health needs of the D/HH community and how mental health apps may be able to support these needs. METHODS: A total of 10 members of the D/HH community participated in a focus group and survey to provide their perspectives and experiences. Participants were members of the Center on Deafness Inland Empire team, which comprises people with lived experience as members of and advocates for the D/HH community. RESULTS: Findings identified a spectrum of needs for mental health apps, including offering American Sign Language and English support, increased education of mental health to reduce stigma around mental health, direct communication with a Deaf worker, and apps that are accessible to a range of community members in terms of culture, resources required, and location. CONCLUSIONS: These findings can inform the development of digital mental health resources and outreach strategies that are appropriate for the D/HH community.
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 | 0.029 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".