Deaf and hard-of-hearing persons appear to have unique knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding preventive medicine, and their attitudes are influenced by their personal experiences with physicians. Preventive practices addressed during health visits may differ between D&HH and hearing patients. Further research is needed to clarify the reasons for these differences, including within D&HH subgroups, and to develop effective mechanisms to improve the health care of all D&HH persons.

Barriers to obtaining breast cancer prevention knowledge and breast cancer screening have been noted among D/deaf women. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is described that tested a culturally and linguistically tailored breast cancer education program conducted among a racially/ethnically diverse sample of 209 D/deaf women age 40 years or older. The study focused on D/deaf women with no more than a secondary education, a population at relatively high risk for incomplete breast health knowledge and services. This population's inadequate breast cancer knowledge and screening practices and the value of the education program were confirmed. Knowledge increased from -baseline to 12-month follow-up in the intervention group, and in some instances the control group; increased intention to get a mammogram was observed in the intervention group. Possible reasons for the few significant intervention/control group differences at 12 months were examined. Materials from the RCT are available online.

This study underscores significant gaps in breast cancer screening knowledge and practices, communication issues in health care settings, and unmet needs for tailored health information and materials in this population. Challenges faced in conducting the research needed to develop and test such programs are noted.

That young children could learn problem-solving strategies was demonstrated (p < .01) with 107 3rd-grade children. A 2 X 2 X 2 factorial design with 2 levels of MA was used. The treatment conditions included multiple-hypotheses testing with and without speaking, and single-hypothesis testing with and without speaking. The problems required the selection of 1 of 4 concepts as the basis for matching an exemplar to a model in each 6-sIide problem. Children taught to use knowledge of results to test 1 concept at a time (SH) scored significantly higher on posttests than did those taught to test several hypotheses at once (MH). Verbalization demonstrated no effect with either treatment group; mental age was an important variable only in the acquisition of the MH strategy.

Effects of labeling and variety were tested with 140 1st grade and 137 kindergarten children under automatically controlled experimental conditions. 6 treatment groups rehearsed either concept or instance labels using 8 concepts with 3 instances, 4 concepts with 6 instances, or 2 concepts with 12 instances. Kindergarten children rehearsing concept rather than instance labels received dependably superior scores in learning but not in transfer tests, lst-grade children demonstrated both superior learning and transfer under concept-rehearsal conditions. Variety also produced significant differences at both age levels on learning tests. Intermediate variety (4 concepts) facilitated transfer to new instances and new concepts for older children. Results indicated the 2-concept, 12-instances condition to be least effective.