S Barnett1, P Franks. 1. Primary Care Institute, Highland Hospital, Rochester, New York, USA. steven_barnett@URMC.rochester.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study was done to determine the prevalence of telephone ownership in different deaf populations and to explore its implications for telephone-based surveys. METHODS: Multivariate analyses, with adjustments for sociodemographics and health status, were done of National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data from 1990 and 1991, the years in which the NHIS Hearing Supplement was administered. RESULTS: Prelingually deafened adults were less likely than members of the general population to own a telephone (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.15, 0.82), whereas postlingually deafened adults were as likely as members of the general population to own one (AOR = 1.00; 95% CI = 0.78, 1.28). CONCLUSIONS: Telephone surveys risk marginalizing prelingually deafened adults because of low telephone ownership and language barriers between the deaf and hearing communities.
OBJECTIVES: This study was done to determine the prevalence of telephone ownership in different deaf populations and to explore its implications for telephone-based surveys. METHODS: Multivariate analyses, with adjustments for sociodemographics and health status, were done of National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data from 1990 and 1991, the years in which the NHIS Hearing Supplement was administered. RESULTS: Prelingually deafened adults were less likely than members of the general population to own a telephone (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.15, 0.82), whereas postlingually deafened adults were as likely as members of the general population to own one (AOR = 1.00; 95% CI = 0.78, 1.28). CONCLUSIONS: Telephone surveys risk marginalizing prelingually deafened adults because of low telephone ownership and language barriers between the deaf and hearing communities.
Authors: Steven Barnett; Jonathan D Klein; Robert Q Pollard; Vincent Samar; Deirdre Schlehofer; Matthew Starr; Erika Sutter; Hongmei Yang; Thomas A Pearson Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2011-10-20 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Fatma Shebl; Carolyn E Poppell; Min Zhan; Diane M Dwyer; Annette B Hopkins; Carmela Groves; Faye Reed; C Devadason; Eileen K Steinberger Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2009 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Michael McKee; Denise Thew; Matthew Starr; Poorna Kushalnagar; John T Reid; Patrick Graybill; Julia Velasquez; Thomas Pearson Journal: Prog Community Health Partnersh Date: 2012