TYPE Systematic Review

PUBLISHED 05 April 2023

DOI 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

Benefits and development of

OPEN ACCESS assistive technologies for Deaf
people’s communication: A
EDITED BY
Waganesh A. Zeleke,
Duquesne University, United States

REVIEWED BY
Janika Leoste,
systematic review
Tallinn University, Estonia
Elena Smolianina,
National Research University Higher School of Paula Andrea Rodríguez-Correa1,2 , Alejandro Valencia-Arias2,3*,
Economics (Perm), Russia
Orfa Nidia Patiño-Toro2 , Yober Oblitas Díaz3 and
*CORRESPONDENCE
Alejandro Valencia-Arias Renata Teodori De la Puente4
[email protected]
1
Centro de investigaciones, Institución Universitaria Escolme, Medellín, Colombia, 2 Departamento de
SPECIALTY SECTION Ciencias Administrativas, Instituto Tecnológico Metropolitano, Medellín, Colombia, 3 Facultad de
This article was submitted to Ingeniería, Arquitectura y Urbanismo, Universidad Señor de Sipán, Chiclayo, Peru, 4 Universidad de San
Special Educational Needs, Martín de Porres, Lima, Peru
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Education

RECEIVED 12 December 2022 The development of technologies has made digital accessibility relevant to many
ACCEPTED 15 March 2023
PUBLISHED 05 April 2023
everyday processes. Multiple resources have been designed to meet the special
needs of a wide variety of people, such as Deaf sign language users, who require
CITATION
Rodríguez-Correa PA, Valencia-Arias A, inclusive technologies to facilitate their communication in work, educational, and
Patiño-Toro ON, Oblitas Díaz Y and Teodori De social environments. The objective of this study is to identify assistive technologies
la Puente R (2023) Benefits and development of
that favor and improve communication between Deaf and hearing people. To this
assistive technologies for Deaf people’s
communication: A systematic review. end, a systematic review was carried out following the PRISMA checklist and using
Front. Educ. 8:1121597. the Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases. A total of 492 documents
doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597
were identified and subjected to inclusion and exclusion criteria, of which 27
COPYRIGHT were included in the quantitative synthesis. As a result, technologies based on
© 2023 Rodríguez-Correa, Valencia-Arias,
Patiño-Toro, Oblitas Díaz and Teodori De la
gesture recognition for the translation of sign language into speech and vice versa,
Puente. This is an open-access article technologies for sign language teaching, technologies for automatic caption
distributed under the terms of the Creative generation, technologies based on online content, and technologies based on
Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use,
distribution or reproduction in other forums is
text and illumination networks were found in the studies. The findings suggest
permitted, provided the original author(s) and that there is a need for further research into the motivations for developing sign
the copyright owner(s) are credited and that language technologies, as a contribution to the inclusion of Deaf communities in
the original publication in this journal is cited, in
accordance with accepted academic practice.
society without linguistic impositions.
No use, distribution or reproduction is
permitted which does not comply with these KEYWORDS
terms.
inclusive technologies, sign language, Deaf community, deaf people, digital technologies,
social inclusion

1. Introduction
Deafness and hearing loss are considered a condition of inability to hear things partially
or totally (Abdallah and Fayyoumi, 2016). From a clinical approach, deafness is considered
as a disability. From a socio-anthropological approach, the deaf is a member of a minority
linguistic community, which speaks a language of its own and its own socio-cultural
characteristics. According to Soleman and Bousquat (2021), from a socio-anthropological
perspective, the deaf are part of a culture in which they apprehend, collect information
and experience the world differently. Thus, the deaf community constitutes its culture and
identity in a sense of pride (Becerra Sepúlveda, 2020), which has even encouraged them to
claim a social conception and name their deaf condition with the capital letter “D.” In this
sense, the term deaf is considered from a clinical and oralist approach; and the term Deaf to
refer to those whose situation is situated in a linguistic and cultural minority (Solano et al.,
2018).

Frontiers in Education 01 frontiersin.org

Rodríguez-Correa et al. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

In recent years, Information and Communication Technologies tolerance to technology; simple, inexpensive, and easy-to-maintain
(ICTs) have taken a leading role in society and, consequently, technology; and facilities for the use of non-official languages.
assistive technologies for deaf communication have achieved Unlike people with other types of disabilities, Deaf
significant progress (Abdallah and Fayyoumi, 2016). In addition, communities have sign languages that enable them to communicate
the advent of the Information Age has made the web and not only with other Deaf persons but also with hearing people.
other forms of digital accessibility relevant to multiple everyday The Deaf, as being part of a minority community, do not have
processes (Botelho, 2021). These changes favor the establishment many opportunities in different areas, due to the limitation
of increasingly broader social interactions using mobile devices communicating their ideas, since they communicate through sign
and computers, which maximize the linguistic and discursive language, a language that few know. Unlike other disabilities,
dynamism of language in a digital universe (de Lima Arcoverde. the deaf have many communication problems with hearing
R.D, 2006). people. Given the importance of these languages, they have been
In the educational context, ICTs have been used to support the subject of numerous studies that seek to contribute to the
learning processes, prepare teaching material, develop e-learning assistance, adaptation, and rehabilitation of Deaf people using
and web-based environments, create mobile applications, and add digital tools known as assistive or inclusive technologies (Abdallah
value to the education of people with special needs, as is the case of and Fayyoumi, 2016). Although technologies alone cannot improve
the Deaf community (Samsudin et al., 2017). Furthermore, assistive complex interaction scenarios for people with hearing impairment,
technologies are fundamental to deaf communication processes in they can help minimize educational and professional barriers that
work, educational, and social spheres (dos Passos Canteri et al., prevent this population from completing, for example, regular
2019). educational stages (Prietch and Filgueiras, 2015).
Deaf people require a variety of accessible teaching strategies Some studies have used learning platforms (Hernández et al.,
based on visual elements and not only on the written word. As 2015; Martins et al., 2015) and electronic devices that recognize,
Elgaml and Baladoh (2014) explain, most educational resources, translate, and present sign language to facilitate autonomous
including e-learning courses, are written for hearing people, learning and improve communication, social inclusion, and quality
without any adaptation for Deaf students. Therefore, digital media of life of Deaf communities. Other studies have employed mobile
should be made available to Deaf people as well, considering their applications that help Deaf people communicate with others who
ways of learning and possible work prospects. have no prior knowledge of the sign language (Abdallah and
Digital transformation must pay attention to accessibility Fayyoumi, 2016). Such applications are based on the translation of
issues, especially when they involve people with disabilities. For these languages and use inclusive technologies as assistive solutions
instance, in many regions of Latin America, there is a marked for sign language recognition (Martins et al., 2015).
technological inequality that mainly affects the most vulnerable Moreover, some studies have considered the position and
populations (Flórez-Aristizábal et al., 2019). The digital divide is preferences of individuals with hearing impairments regarding
wider in developing countries than in developed ones for reasons technologies. The study by Findlater et al. (2019) addresses the
ranging from inequality, technological infrastructure, poverty, and interest in sound awareness and the preferences for mobile or
educational deficiency to problems of race, gender, and ethnicity, wearable sound awareness systems for Deaf people. The results of
which encompass the current situation of people with disabilities this study revealed “a strong preference for having both haptic and
and directly influence their digital exclusion (Berrío Zapata et al., visual feedback, the latter particularly for captions, with the most
2021). preferred device design being haptic notifications on a smartwatch
However, there are also islands of digital exclusion in poorer and visual information on a head-mounted display or smartphone.”
or less integrated communities within developed countries. Deaf Digital technologies can, therefore, be used as instruments
people belonging to these communities usually find economic and of appropriation of sign language (in educational processes, for
linguistic restrictions, in addition to accessibility barriers (Abascal example). They also open possibilities for new constructions
et al., 2015). Even if they have access to different digital tools of a space of appropriation that is increasingly being explored
that could support their inclusion in society, basic training in sign in the training of Deaf people, given its assembly nature (de
language, literacy, and digital skills is necessary to use them. Most Lima Arcoverde. R.D, 2006). In addition, the findings of the
of the digital tools they have access to are designed for listeners, studies in this field denote the importance of cultural and
such as educational platforms, virtual libraries, books and even social considerations for the successful adoption of these types
social networks. The integration of these abilities can be used to of technologies.
ensure access to basic education for marginalized sectors of the Addressing the problems of a group of people with disabilities
population (Abascal et al., 2015). In addition, digital tools should be by using a single device represents an enormous research and
considered to improve the communication process of Deaf people development challenge. In fact, many solutions have been proposed
using sign language translation, given its global reach as a visual- separately for people with hearing, speech, and visual impairments.
spatial language, and considering the native languages of the Deaf However, the study by Karmel et al. (2019) presents an assistive
community in each country (Martins et al., 2015). device based on the Internet of Things that offers image-to-text
Therefore, a comprehensive approach to incorporate digital conversion and speech synthesis. In addition, it converts the speech
accessibility measures in marginalized populations, such as the Deaf recorded by the microphone into text that is then displayed on the
community in developing countries, should include, according to screen as a pop-up window for the user to read it. The purpose
Abascal et al. (2015), new methods for shared access to ICTs; of these types of multimodal technologies is to give people with

Frontiers in Education 02 frontiersin.org

Rodríguez-Correa et al. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

TABLE 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

disabilities independence and confidence in seeing, hearing, and
speaking for themselves by means of assistive technologies.
Exclusion criteria Inclusion criteria
The studies mentioned above have made it clear that Deaf
people face many difficulties in their daily lives, given their inability Other types of disabilities other Diagnosis falling within the spectrum
than deafness of deafness regardless of etiology
to communicate with people who do not understand sign language
(Yaganoglu, 2021). These difficulties may affect their personal Assistive technologies developed Assistive technologies intended to
to improve autonomy or hearing improve communication and
and work life and hinder their academic development (Prietch interpersonal and social interaction
and Filgueiras, 2015). The studies also highlight the need for
Assistive technologies classified as Assistive technologies that integrate
assistive technologies that allow Deaf communities to communicate medical devices, hearing aids, and sign language
effectively with those who do not use the same language, not to cochlear implants
mention their difficulty to learn to read and write.
Assistive technologies of a private Assistive technology of an accessible
Based on the above, some researchers have focused on nature or not based on sign nature
developing inclusive digital tools that meet the needs of Deaf language
people (Martins et al., 2015; Prietch and Filgueiras, 2015; Abdallah Abstracts, conference Scientific articles
and Fayyoumi, 2016; Findlater et al., 2019). Consequently, they proceedings, book chapters, or
research books
have identified barriers for the Deaf community to access certain
technologies, as well as a latent need to communicate with hearing
people without the obligation to learn their language and without
compromising their own.
communication, and social interaction between Deaf and hearing
The objective of this systematic literature review is, therefore,
communities. The articles should also respond to the need for
to identify assistive technologies that include sign language and
accessibility, considering free and low-cost resources, according to
facilitate and promote communication between Deaf and hearing
the claims of each of the authors proposing the technology, e.g.,
communities. In addition, it would be useful to identify research
access through an institution or free access through a web page,
gaps and create a roadmap for future research in this field. As a
patent release, low cost of materials, among others. We did not
result, we addressed the following research questions:
consider publications other than articles because, as Dyzel et al.
1. What types of assistive technologies facilitate and promote Deaf (2020) explain, they might be in the prototype phase and lack
people’s communication? validity if they are not tested in daily care settings. The publication
2. In which geographical contexts are assistive technologies period and language were not taken into account.
proposed to facilitate and promote communication in
sign language?
3. What can be the future lines of research in this field?
2.2. Information sources

In this section, we should describe all information sources

2. Method used in the search, as well as the last search date. The sources
of information include databases and contact with study authors
This study consisted of a systematic literature review using
to identify additional studies (Hutton et al., 2016). Considering
the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-
the complexity of the study population and the variety of assistive
Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Following Hutton et al. (2016), “the
technologies, we combined technical, medical, and social science
PRISMA statement is a guide on research publishing designed
research fields (Dyzel et al., 2020). Consequently, we selected
to improve the integrity of reporting systematic reviews and
databases relevant to these fields, namely, Scopus, Web of Science,
meta-analyses” (p. 262). This statement helps researchers improve
and PubMed. Finally, we conducted the search in May 2022.
the presentation of systematic literature reviews by laying out
guidelines for planning, preparing, and publishing them (Moher
et al., 2014). The statement consists of a checklist that includes
27 items summarized in four phases: identification, screening, 2.3. Search strategy
eligibility, and inclusion. Based on the above, we established the
following parameters: In the words of Welch et al. (2016), we should present an
electronic search strategy for every database, including any limits
used, so that there are no repetitions. This search strategy is
2.1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria typically based on the terms used. In the present study, we
conducted the search in titles and keywords for the most part;
To identify the articles most relevant to the objective of this however, on the PubMed database, we also considered abstracts.
research, we conducted three eligibility review rounds in titles, The terms used were synonyms for deafness, assistive technologies,
abstracts, keywords, and full texts. The inclusion and exclusion and digital tools. Additionally, we included Boolean operators to
criteria can be found in Table 1. We sought to include only build the strings and refine the search. We used AND to combine
research articles on deafness as a condition to be studied and on terms, OR to include search synonyms, and ∗ when appropriate.
the use of assistive technologies to improve the interpretation, The search strings employed on each database are shown below:

Frontiers in Education 03 frontiersin.org

Rodríguez-Correa et al. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

Scopus: TITLE ((deaf∗ OR “hard of hearing” OR “hearing- analysis to answer the research questions: the types of technologies
impaired” OR “unhearing” OR “unable to hear”) AND ((“assistive that exist to date through a thorough analysis by the researchers,
technologies” OR (assistive AND techno∗ ) OR (digital∗ AND (tool the geographical context that can be obtained from the metadata
OR tech∗ ))))) OR KEY ((deaf∗ OR “hard of hearing” OR “hearing- generated by the databases selected in the affiliation of the
impaired” OR “unhearing” OR “unable to hear”) AND ((“assistive researchers, and the future lines of research, based on the analysis
technologies” OR (assistive AND techno∗ ) OR (digital∗ AND (tool of gaps that are evident in the review.
OR tech∗ ))))) The results of this study aim to answer the research questions
Web of Science: (TI=(((deaf∗ OR “hard of hearing” OR concerning the types of technologies found and the geographical
“hearing-impaired” OR “unhealing” OR “unable to hear”) AND context in which they are proposed. To this end, we characterized
((“assistive technologies” OR (assistive AND techno∗ ) OR (digital∗ the studies according to the type of technology proposed, the
AND (tool OR tech∗ ))))))) OR AK=(((deaf∗ OR “hard of hearing” country where it was developed, the considered benefits, and the
OR “hearing-impaired” OR “unhealing” OR “unable to hear”) AND Technology Readiness Level (TRL). These levels were assigned
((“assistive technologies” OR (assistive AND techno∗ ) OR (digital∗ based on the definitions originally proposed by NASA and that
AND (tool OR tech∗ )))))) have been implemented in different non-aeronautical projects.
PubMed: ((deaf∗ [Title/Abstract] OR “hard of According to Héder (2017), the TRLs are classified as follows:
hearing”[Title/Abstract] OR “hearing-impaired”[Title/Abstract]
OR “unhearing”[Title/Abstract] OR “unable to hear” TRL 1. Basic principles observed.
[Title/Abstract]) AND ((“assistive technologies”[Title/Abstract] TRL 2. Technology concept formulated.
OR (assistive[Title/Abstract] AND techno∗ [Title/Abstract]) TRL 3. Experimental proof of concept.
OR (digital∗ [Title/Abstract] AND (tool[Title/Abstract] OR TRL 4. Technology validated in laboratory.
tech∗ [Title/Abstract]))))). TRL 5. Technology validated in relevant environment.
TRL 6. Technology demonstrated in relevant environment.
TRL 7. System prototype demonstration in operational
2.4. Selection process environment.
TRL 8. System complete and qualified.
We obtained a total of 576 records: 360 from Scopus, 44 from TRL 9. Actual system proven in operational environment
Web of Science, and 172 from PubMed. However, we removed (competitive manufacturing).
R
84 duplicate publications after a review in Microsoft Excel and
analyzed the remaining 492. First, we filtered out conference Thus, all technologies were assigned to a TRL based on an
proceedings, book chapters, and publications other than scientific analysis performed by the researchers according to each author’s
articles. Then, we reviewed the title, abstract, and keywords of description of the state of the technologies. We grouped the
each article to exclude those related to conditions other than different types of technologies according to their similarities
deafness. Subsequently, we removed the publications that proposed in terms of purpose, design, and use. The researchers decided
assistive technologies for speech rehabilitation, as well as those that rather than describing each of the functionalities of the
about hearing aids and cochlear implants. Afterward, we reviewed technologies, it would be more appropriate to group them
the full texts to ensure that the technologies selected were accessible according to their functionality. In that way, technologies for
and affordable so that they could meet the needs of the vulnerable sign language interpretation, sign language training, automatic text
populations in which the world’s Deaf communities are generally generation, digital content for the Deaf, and with functionality for
immersed. Three reviewers were responsible for reviewing article mobile devices in text and lighting networks are grouped together.
by article to identify whether the proposed technology could be Therefore, we were able to determine that most of the proposed
freely available or was a low-cost technology. At this point, we technologies were based on gesture recognition for the translation of
had 57 records left. Finally, we excluded 30 more articles because sign language into speech and vice versa (see Table 2). These tools
they were literature reviews or analyses of factors that influenced favor the communication between Deaf people and hearing people
the intention to use inclusive technologies, which did not propose who do not use sign language, so they can be implemented in
any new technology. The researchers omitted these studies on educational, work, and social contexts. This type of technology has
the premise that investigations of correlation of variables and received particular interest from researchers because it addresses
acceptance of technologies did not respond to the objective of this an essential need of the Deaf community; consequently, there is a
study. As a result, we obtained a total of 27 eligible records. Figure 1 current trend to develop similar tools.
summarizes the process followed to select the articles relevant to the We also identified developments focused on sign language
objective of this study. teaching (see Table 3), such as dictionaries, encyclopedias, courses,
and games. These resources not only support the learning process
of Deaf individuals, but also of their relatives, friends, and teachers.
3. Results Although this type of technology can be used by most people, it is
primarily designed for Deaf children.
We considered a total of 27 articles that propose Similarly, we found a type of technology for automatic
assistive technologies to facilitate and improve Deaf people’s caption generation (see Table 4) with applicability to mobile
communication. Each of the selected articles is subjected to an devices. Considering that Deaf people usually experience difficulties

Frontiers in Education 04 frontiersin.org

Rodríguez-Correa et al. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

FIGURE 1
Flow diagram of the identification and selection process.

during telephone conversations, these technologies automatically networks (see Table 6). These technologies are useful because
recognize speech and convert it into text, thus facilitating their communication via mobile devices has facilitated the interaction of
communication. Visual content can make information more Deaf people with other Deaf and hearing people, especially thanks
accessible to people with hearing impairment, but particularly to to the boom in the use of social networks by this community.
those who understand the written language of their country. In The studies analyzed were carried out mainly in Brazil and the
this sense, this technology is not useful to Deaf individuals who United States (eight records for each country); therefore, they are
understand only sign language. the reference contexts for the development of assistive technologies
Some authors have also proposed technologies based on for the Deaf community. The technologies developed in Brazil
online content and courses (see Table 5). These technologies offer translation of Brazilian Sign Language (Libras) into speech
are interesting because they make available to Deaf people (in and vice versa, automatic caption generation for television and
sign language) topics of general interest related, for example, online content, and courses in sign language to contribute to the
to health or the use of mobile devices. In addition, e-learning accessibility of the Deaf community to online training. Similarly,
technologies are increasingly being implemented in educational the technologies developed in the United States focus on offering
processes with significant advances in ICTs. Therefore, they translation of American Sign Language into English by means of
represent an opportunity for Deaf people to access inclusive systems ranging from web and mobile applications to gloves. They
education, considering their availability, accessibility, usability, also produce educational content to be shared online with the
and affordability. Deaf community.
Lastly, we identified text-based technologies supported We also found a relevant number of studies in India and
by mobile devices and illumination-based communication Saudi Arabia, which have also developed technologies for gesture

Frontiers in Education 05 frontiersin.org

Rodríguez-Correa et al. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

TABLE 2 Technologies based on gesture recognition for the translation of sign language into speech and vice versa.

Authors Technology Readiness level Country Benefits

Gupta et al. (2022) Online sign language translation TRL 7 prototype India It transforms sign language into speech. It can be
platform—Gesture recognition used by Deaf and hearing people to exchange ideas

Dignan et al. (2022) Gesture recognition system TRL 6 prototype United States It proposes a hybrid approach that takes advantage
of low-cost sensory hardware and combines it with a
smart sign-recognition algorithm to develop a more
efficient gesture-recognition system

Areeb et al. (2022) Hand gesture recognition models to TRL 6 prototype India It helps people with hearing impairment in
predict emergency signs emergency situations. It can be used with other sign
languages

Alkhalifa and Bilingual (Arabic/English) TRL 7 prototype Saudi Arabia It supports real-time transcription, real-time
Al-Razgan (2018) smartphone-based hearing aid translation, and alert management for sign language
application - Enssat translation

De Martino et al. (2017) Automatic Brazilian TRL 6 prototype Brazil It aims to improve the bilingual education
Portuguese-to-Libras translation experience for deaf children, facilitating the
system understanding of written Portuguese and fostering
sign language proficiency

El-Gayyar et al. (2016) Arabic speech-to-Arabic Sign TRL 7 prototype Saudi Arabia It aims to assist deaf individuals to communicate
Language translation application effectively with the great public to gain a better social
based on cloud computing - life
ABTS-ArSL

de Araújo et al. (2013) Architecture for machine translation TRL 9 available Brazil It can be integrated and implemented in digital TV
to Libras - LibrasTV systems, a real-time and open-domain scenario

Sarji (2008) Smart glove that can recognize basic TRL 6 prototype United States It is a low-cost system that demonstrates that
hand gestures and convert them into embedded systems do not have to be expensive to be
speech - HandTalk effective

Su et al. (2001) Recognition of 3D arm movements TRL 6 prototype Taiwan It can classify different types of arm movements by
involved in Taiwanese Sign Language comparing cumulative similarities. It facilitates
communication between Deaf and hearing people

Parthasarathy et al. Wearable continuous TRL 6 prototype United States It facilitates communication between hearing people
(2022) gesture-to-speech conversion system (untrained in sign language) and people with
hearing impairment. It is a low-cost device

Kushalnagar et al. Video remote interpreting TRL 7 prototype United States Healthcare and rehabilitation providers may choose
(2019) technology to provide VRI over traditional in-person
interpreters due to cost and flexibility

de Araújo et al. (2014) Software components for automatic TRL 7 prototype Brazil It has a set of mechanisms that use human
generation and insertion of sign computation to generate and maintain linguistic
language video tracks into captioned constructions. It can be used on digital TV, digital
digital multimedia content cinema, and web platforms

recognition and mobile applications for sign language teaching. systems for meetings and other work tasks, social networks for
Finally, Colombia, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Taiwan the Deaf, among others. In addition, the design of inclusive
have one study each. These countries have shown interest in technologies based on sign language for different age groups
sign language translation, digital content creation, and text-based such as adults should be considered and could be addressed in
technologies for mobile devices. future research.
The participation of different countries gives us an overview of
the development of assistive technologies for the Deaf community
around the world. Most of the technologies analyzed have been 4. Discussion
developed in the Americas, mainly in Brazil and the United States.
On the European continent and in the Spanish-speaking countries The integration of sign languages into the design and
of Latin America, we identified a few technological developments. development of communication technologies denotes recognition
The participation of Asian countries is relevant, although we did of the right to autonomy and respect for the Deaf culture.
not find developments in countries with strong economies, such as In this sense, as Llamazares de Prado (2021) stated, the use
China, South Korea, and Japan. of inclusive technologies favors the democratization of culture
On the other hand, future lines of research could focus and access to information regardless of where in the world one
on the design and development of inclusive technologies in lives, in an increasingly globalized society with multiple forms
different scenarios, for example, labor and social. In this way, of communication. For this reason, it is important that deaf
labor adaptation technologies for the Deaf could be proposed, communities all over the world have access to low-cost or free
such as a sign language interpreter for each organization, alert inclusive technologies.

Frontiers in Education 06 frontiersin.org

Rodríguez-Correa et al. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

TABLE 3 Sign language teaching technologies.

Authors Technology Readiness level Country Benefits

Pontes et al. (2020) Educational game to teach numbers TRL 7 prototype Brazil It bridges the gaps between Deaf and hearing
in Libras—MatLIBRAS Racing students in academic environments. It motivates the
learning and reproduction of natural numbers in
BSL through entertainment and competition. It can
be used with other sign languages

Joy et al. (2018) Bilingual mobile dictionary for TRL 9 available India It has features for converting camera-captured text
Indian Sign Language - SignDict into sign language and translating simple sentences
from a spoken language into their corresponding
signs. The availability of SignDict as a mobile
application will help to extend learning outside
classrooms and peer groups. It will also make
learning possible for parents of Deaf children and
other learners

Joy et al. (2019) Sign vocabulary learning TRL 7 prototype India It is very effective in sign vocabulary development. It
application—SiLearn can enhance vocabulary learning rate considerably

Meinzen-Derr et al. Augmentative and alternative TRL 7 prototype United States It supports continued and rapid language growth
(2016) communication technology for among elementary school-age children who are deaf
enhancing language development of or hard of hearing with language underperformance
Deaf children

Capovilla et al. (2003) Brazilian sign language digital TRL 9 available Brazil It includes a sublexical-component indexing system
encyclopedia and a menu-based sign-retrieval system. These allow
deaf users to locate specific signs based on five
parameters: hands, fingers, place, movement, and
facial expression. It takes sign language dictionaries
beyond the traditional alphabetical indexing of
glosses

TABLE 4 Automatic caption generation technology.

Authors Technology Readiness level Country Benefits

Zekveld et al. (2008) Automatic caption generation system TRL 7 prototype Netherlands Uses an online automatic speech recognition system
to improve telephone
communication

TABLE 5 Technologies based on online content.

Authors Technology Readiness level Country Benefits

Flórez-Aristizábal et al. Digital interactive storytelling for TRL 7 Prototype Colombia It supports the creation of all kinds of stories
(2019) digital literacy through Deaf children’s imagination. It can
positively influence the mood of the students. It
motivates and engages children in literacy learning

Carvalho et al. (2019) Online courses Available Brazil It supports nursing care for people with disabilities

de Carvalho and Course using augmented reality Available Brazil It can bridge the gaps in the literacy process of Deaf
Manzini (2017) technology students. It enhances the process of appropriation of
relationships and, thus, broadens the
communicative repertoire of this population

Áfio et al. (2016) Online course Available Brazil It is an accessible online course targeted at Deaf
people

Dahm and Reese (2021) Inclusive online learning TRL 6 Prototype United States It helps to close the information accessibility gap in
environment libraries

Boudreault et al. (2018) Online video material Available United States It makes genetic education materials available to
Deaf people online and in sign language

In recent years, assistive technologies have been intended design, development, acquisition, implementation, and impact.
to improve Deaf people’s communication and interaction. The This demonstrates the researchers’ interest in assessing these
analysis of the contribution of these tools to society has gone technologies from their potential to improve the psychological
beyond the technical and practical aspects. For example, in their wellbeing and quality of life of people with special needs, as well as
study, Dyzel et al. (2020) analyzed assistive technologies for the barriers to access. Likewise, in this study, we are concerned that
people with hearing or visual impairment in terms of purpose, the selected technologies respond to the needs for accessibility of a

Frontiers in Education 07 frontiersin.org

Rodríguez-Correa et al. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

TABLE 6 Technologies based on text and illumination networks.

Authors Technology Readiness level Country Benefits

Roos and Wengelin Text-telephone technology Available Sweden It contributes to improving the self-esteem, equality,
(2016) and independence of Deaf people
It facilitates interaction between Deaf and hearing
people

Spicer et al. (2009) Text telephones designed for people Available United Kingdom It facilitates communication
with impaired hearing It meets the communication needs of users with
impaired hearing

Hinman et al. (2003) Talking lights illumination-based TRL 7 prototype United States It modulates ordinary fluorescent lighting to carry
communication networks to enhance an assistive data signal throughout a room while
word comprehension by Deaf people causing no flicker or other distracting visual
problems

global community that, from a general perspective, has problems of the assistive technologies that we identified in this study are in a
in accessing this type of resources, given its socioeconomic prototype phase. In addition, we must consider the financial factor
vulnerability condition (Alshawabkeh et al., 2021). because developing accessible, sustainable, and implementable
In the same vein, Sousa et al. (2019) explain that accessibility technologies is costly and time-consuming.
and usability are fundamental aspects of assistive technologies This study addressed general issues of assistive technologies:
for Deaf people. Accessibility is paramount to understanding integration of sign language, accessibility, and improved
information. Accessible formats include, among others, sign communication between Deaf and hearing people. These
language and captions, which have a direct impact on the usability types of technologies empower Deaf communities to express their
of this type of technology. However, it contrasts with reality. needs and rights, strengthen their culture, and actively participate
In recent years, numerous studies on inclusive technologies in a new society that does not impose its language.
have investigated the development of skills related to oral The results of this study provide an overview of the
communication. As a result, there is an important number of technological options currently available to Deaf sign language
technologies based on cochlear implants and other devices that users. They can be useful to private organizations, educational
help improve hearing and support speech rehabilitation and lip institutions, governmental entities, and, in general, to all
movement recognition. However, in this study, we sought to individuals and organizations involved in the development of
identify assistive technologies based on sign language to enhance assistive technologies based on sign language. The findings also
Deaf people’s communication through digital literacy. As Flórez reveal the need to review and analyze government policies and
Aristizábal et al. (2017) state, there is a clear need to conduct more strategies for the development, generation, dissemination, and
studies and develop more technologies that promote the use of promotion of these tools.
sign language and ICTs in educational environments, especially for
children, given the importance of learning processes at this stage of
life. Such studies and developments should also encourage the use 5. Conclusions
of digital assistive tools inside and outside the classroom to facilitate
communication between Deaf and hearing people. The objective of this study was to identify assistive tools and
Along the same lines, using assistive technologies to teach sign systems targeted at Deaf communities. We selected 27 articles
language at different academic levels is necessary and beneficial not that proposed different types of technologies to facilitate and
only to students but also to teachers and relatives. Furthermore, improve communication between Deaf and hearing people, that is,
following Llamazares De Prado and Arias Gago (2020), the technologies for sign language teaching, technologies for automatic
adoption of hybrid technology approaches under the principles of caption generation, and technologies based on online content, text,
universal design can help integrate access to education and sign illumination, or gesture recognition for the translation of sign
language literacy. Therefore, Deaf communities require assistive language into speech and vice versa.
technologies based on sign language that can be implemented in Most of the technologies described are in a prototype phase
different contexts. at the final readiness levels. This may be due to financial reasons
Although a considerable number of technologies are targeted at because these projects are typically expensive, time-consuming, and
Deaf students, there is still a pressing need to adapt workspaces with difficult to run, given the context and needs of this community. In
assistive technologies for Deaf adults. Alshawabkeh et al. (2021) addition, researchers usually need to understand sign language to
explain that the currently available tools are insufficient to meet the develop technologies of this type. In this sense, we highlight the
needs of Deaf people in the workplace. Such technologies should efforts made in Brazil and the United States.
also favor the use of sign language with universal applicability. This The findings of this study suggest that there is a need for
summarizes the possible future lines of research in this field, thus further research on the motivations for developing inclusive
answering the third research question. technologies based on sign language and targeted at the world’s
One of the difficulties in conducting research on the Deaf Deaf communities. These technologies should also strengthen
community is the diversity of needs that surround it. In fact, most the teaching of sign language to Deaf children with the support

Frontiers in Education 08 frontiersin.org

Rodríguez-Correa et al. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

of digital tools and the technological adaptation of workspaces methodology, and funding acquisition. PR-C and RT
for Deaf adults. Furthermore, researchers should also consider performed the validation and wrote the first draft of the
variables such as the communication systems available; the learning manuscript. All authors contributed to review, visualization,
abilities of the different Deaf individuals; and the usability, editing, and read and agreed to the published version of
accessibility, utility, and acceptability of the assistive systems and the manuscript.
tools to be developed.
The development of assistive technologies based on sign
language contributes to the inclusion of the Deaf community in Funding
society and strengthens its culture and identity. In addition, it
addresses real needs of this population and transforms linguistic Support for this research was provided by project (grant
imposition into respect for the Deaf culture, integrating it into no. P20232) Methodological proposal for the design and
educational, work, and social contexts. development of MOOCs aimed at strengthening labor skills in
the deaf population of Medellín from the Instituto Tecnológico
Metropolitano, Medellín, Colombia.
5.1. Limitations

Assistive technologies do not ensure the full inclusion of the Acknowledgments

Deaf community in society. In fact, not all individuals have access
to these tools. Although we sought to select low-cost or free The authors would like to thank Universidad Señor de
technologies, they are usually accessed only in the countries where Sipán, Chiclayo - Perú for the support with the payment
they were developed; therefore, they need to be disseminated so of APC.
that they can reach the people who really need them. Consequently,
the lack of information prevents Deaf people from benefiting from
these resources. Moreover, most of the technologies described in Conflict of interest
this paper are not yet fully developed, so we still must wait for these
projects to be successfully completed and to benefit the people for The authors declare that the research was conducted
whom they were designed. in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships
that could be construed as a potential conflict
of interest.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included
in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be Publisher’s note
directed to the corresponding author.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated
Author contributions organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the
reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
PR-C and YO performed the formal analysis and data claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
curation. AV-A and OP-T performed the conceptualization, endorsed by the publisher.

References
Abascal, J., Barbosa, S. D., Nicolle, C., and Zaphiris, P. (2015). Rethinking universal Aristizábal, L. F., Cano, S., Collazos, C. A., Solano, A., and Slegers, K. (2017).
accessibility: a broader approach considering the digital gap. Univ. Acc. Inform. Soc. 15, “Collaborative learning as educational strategy for deaf children: a systematic
179–182. doi: 10.1007/S10209-015-0416-1 literature review CCS CONCEPTS,” in Proceedings of the XVIII International
Conference on Human Computer Interaction. New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp. 1–8.
Abdallah, E. E., and Fayyoumi, E. (2016). (2016). “Assistive technology for deaf
doi: 10.1145./3123818
people based on android platform,” in Procedia Computer Science. Elsevier, B.V., pp.
295–301. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.08044 Becerra Sepúlveda, C. A. (2020). Inclusión e interculturalidad para la cultura Sorda:
Áfio, A. C. E., Carvalho, A. T. D., Carvalho, L. V. D., Silva, A. S. R. D., and Pagliuca, caminos recorridos y desafíos pendientes. Rev. de Invest. Edu. de La Red. 11, 1–23.
L. M. F. (2016). Avaliação da acessibilidade de tecnologia assistiva para surdos. Rev. doi: 10.33010/ierierediech.v11i0.792
Bras. Enferm., 69, 833–839. doi: 10.1590/0034-7167.2016690503 Berrío Zapata, C., Chaves dos Santos, Z.E., and Chalhub Oliveira, T. (2021).
Alkhalifa, S., and Al-Razgan, M. (2018). Enssat: wearable technology application Exclusión digital de las comunidades de personas con discapacidad en Brasil. Revista
for the deaf and hard of hearing. Multimed. Tools Appl. 77, 22007–22031. Cubana de Información en Ciencias de la Salud, 31, e1567. Available at: http://scielo.
doi: 10.1007/S11042-018-5860-5/TABLES/5 sld.cu/scielo.php?pid=S2307-21132020000400014andscript=sci_arttextandtlng=en
(accessed March 22, 2022).
Alshawabkeh, A. A., Woolsey, M. L., and Kharbat, F. F. (2021). Using online
information technology for deaf students during COVID-19: A closer look from Botelho, F. H. F. (2021). Accessibility to digital technology: Virtual barriers,
experience. Heliyon 7, e06915. doi: 10.1016/J.HELIYON.2021.E06915 real opportunities. Assis. Technol. 33, 27–34. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2021.194
5705
Areeb, Q. M., Nadeem, M., Alroobaea, R., and Anwer, F. (2022). Helping Hearing-
Impaired in Emergency Situations: A Deep Learning-Based Approach. IEEE Access, 10, Boudreault, P., Wolfson, A., Berman, B., Venne, V. L., Sinsheimer, J. S., Palmer,
8502–8517. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3142918 C. (2018). Bilingual cancer genetic education modules for the deaf community:

Frontiers in Education 09 frontiersin.org

Rodríguez-Correa et al. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1121597

development and evaluation of the online video material. J. Genet. Couns. 27, 457–469. Joy, J., Balakrishnan, K., and Sreeraj, M. (2019). SiLearn: an
doi: 10.1007/S10897-017-0188-2 intelligent sign vocabulary learning tool. J. Enabl. Technol. 13, 173–187.
doi: 10.1108/JET-03-2019-0014/FULL/XML
Capovilla, F. C., Duduchi, M., Raphael, W. D., Luz, R. D., Rozados, D.,
Capovilla, A. G., et al. (2003). Brazilian sign language lexicography and technology: Karmel, A., Sharma, A., and Garg, D. (2019). IoT based assistive device
dictionary, digital encyclopedia, chereme-based sign retrieval, and quadriplegic deaf for deaf, dumb and blind people. Procedia Comput. Sci., 165, pp. 259–269.
communication systems. Sign Lang. Stud. 3, 393–430. doi: 10.1353/SLS.2003.0015 doi: 10.1016/J.PROCS.01080
Carvalho, A. T., Áfio, A. C. E., Marques, J. F., Pagliuca, L. M. F., Carvalho, L. V., Kushalnagar, P., Paludneviciene, R., and Kushalnagar, R. (2019). Video remote
et al. (2019). Instructional design in nursing: Assistive technologies for the blind and interpreting technology in health care: cross-sectional study of deaf patients’
deaf. Cog. Enferm. 24. doi: 10.5380./CE.V24I0.62767 experiences. JMIR Rehabil. Assist. Technol. 6, e13233. doi: 10.2196/13233

Dahm, J. J., and Reese, J. G. (2021). Sharing electronically and accessibly in library- Llamazares de Prado, J. E. (2021). Sign language teaching technological advances
led instruction. J. Med. Lib. Assoc. JMLA, 109, 690. doi: 10.5195/JMLA.2021.1361 and differences in international contexts. Int. J. Inform. Learn. Technol. 38, 433–453.
doi: 10.1108/IJILT-11-2020-0206/FULL/XML
de Araújo, T. M. U., Ferreira, F. L., Silva, D. A., Oliveira, L. D., Falcão, E. L.,
Llamazares De Prado, J. E., and Arias Gago, A. R. (2020). Sign Language Policy in
Domingues, L. A. et al. (2014). An approach to generate and embed sign language video
the International Arena and Spanish, the Value of the Interpreter and the Teacher. Int.
tracks into multimedia contents. Inf. Sci., 281, pp. 762–780. doi: 10.1016/J.INS.04008
J. Disabil. Develop. Edu. 4, 577. doi: 10.1080./1034912X.2020.1849577
de Araújo, T. M. U., Ferreira, F. L. S., dos Santos Silva, D. A. N., Lemos, Martins, P., Rodrigues, H., Rocha, T., Francisco, M., and Morgado, L. (2015).
F. H., Neto, G. P., Omaia, D., et al. (2013). Automatic generation of Brazilian Accessible options for deaf people in e-learning platforms: technology solutions for sign
sign language windows for digital TV systems. J. Brazil. Comp. Soc. 19, 107–125. language translation. Proced. Comput. Sci., 67, 263–272. doi: 10.1016/J.PROCS.09270
doi: 10.1007/s13173-012-0086-2
Meinzen-Derr, J., Wiley, S., McAuley, R., Smith, L., and Grether, S. (2016).
de Carvalho, D., and Manzini, E. J. (2017). Aplicação de um programa de ensino de Technology-assisted language intervention for children who are deaf or hard-
palavras em libras utilizando tecnologia de realidade aumentada. Rev. Brasil. de Edu. of-hearing; a pilot study of augmentative and alternative communication for
Espec. 23, 215–232. doi: 10.1590/S1413-65382317000200005 enhancing language development. Disabil. Rehabil, Assist. Technol. 12, 808–815.
de Lima Arcoverde. R.D (2006). Tecnologias digitais: novo espaço doi: 10.1080/17483107.2016.1269210
interativo na produção escrita dos surdos. Cadernos CEDES, 26, 251–267. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., and PRISMA, G., et al.
doi: 10.1590/S0101-32622006000200008 (2014). Ítems de referencia para publicar Revisiones Sistemáticas y Metaanálisis: La
De Martino, J. M., Silva, I. R., Bolognini, C. Z., Costa, P. D. P., Kumada, K. M. O., Declaración PRISMA. Revista Española de Nutrición Humana y Dietética, 18, 172–181.
Coradine, L. C., et al. (2017). Signing avatars: making education more inclusive. Univ. doi: 10.14306/renhyd.18.3.114
Access Inform. Soc. 16, 793–808. doi: 10.1007/S10209-016-0504-X/TABLES/3 Parthasarathy, V., Thangavelu, N., Ramesh, J., Suresh, B., Kandasamy, K.,
Dignan, C., Perez, E., Ahmad, I., Huber, M., and Clark, A. (2022). An AI-based Nagarajan, N., et al. (2022). Development of a low-resource wearable continuous
approach for improved sign language recognition using multiple videos. Multimed. gesture-to-speech conversion system. Disabil. Rehabil, Assist. Technol. 5, 2787.
Tools Appl., pp. 1–22. doi: 10.1007./S11042-021-11830-Y/TABLES/11 doi: 10.1080./17483107.2021.2022787

dos Passos Canteri, R., García, L. S., de Felipe, T. A., Galvao, L. F. O., and Pontes, H. P., Furlan Duarte, J. B., and Pinheiro, P. R. (2020). An educational game
Antunes, D. R. (2019). “Conceptual framework to support a web authoring tool to teach numbers in Brazilian Sign Language while having fun. Comp. Human Behav.
of educational games for deaf children,” in Proceedings of the 11th International 107, 105825. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.003
Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2019), pp. 226–235. Prietch, S. S., and Filgueiras, L. V. L. (2015). “Technology acceptance
doi: 10.5220./0007676102260235 evaluation by deaf students considering the inclusive education context,” in
Dyzel, V., Oosterom-Calo, R., Worm, M., and Sterkenburg, P. S. (2020). Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial
Assistive technology to promote communication and social interaction Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). (Verlag: Springer), pp. 20–37.
for people with deafblindness: a systematic review. Fron. Edu. 5, 164. doi: 10.1007./978-3-319-22701-6_2/FIGURES/3
doi: 10.3389/FEDUC.2020.578389/BIBTEX Roos, C., and Wengelin, Å. (2016). The text telephone as an empowering technology
Elgaml, A. F., and Baladoh, S. M. (2014). An Intelligent Web-based System to in the daily lives of deaf people—A qualitative study. Assist. Technol., 28, 63–73.
Enhance Digital Circuits Concepts and Skills for Deaf Students. Int. J. Engin. Innovat. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2015.1085923
Technol. (IJEIT), 4, 20–26. Available at: https://www.ijeit.com/Vol%204/Issue%202/ Samsudin, M., Guan, T., Yusof, A., and Yaacob, M. (2017). A review of mobile
IJEIT1412201408_04.pdf (accessed March 22, 2022). application characteristics based on teaching and learning. Int. J. Technol. Edu. Sci. 1,
El-Gayyar, M. M., Ibrahim, A. S., and Wahed, M. E. (2016). Translation from Arabic 24–28 Available online at: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/207272/ (accessed March 22,
speech to Arabic sign language based on cloud computing. Egyptian Inform. J. 17, 2022).
295–303. doi: 10.1016/J.EIJ.04001 Sarji, D. K. (2008). HandTalk: Assistive technology for the deaf. Computer 41, 84–86.
Findlater, L., Chinh, B., Jain, D., Froehlich, J., Kushalnagar, R., and Lin, A. doi: 10.1109/MC.2008.226
C. (2019). “Deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals’ preferences for wearable Solano, C. I. H., Barraza, J. A. V., Avelar, R. S., and Bustos, G. N. (2018). No
and mobile sound awareness technologies,” in Conference on Human Factors a la discapacidad: La Sordera como minoría lingüística y cultural. Revista Nacional
in Computing Systems - Proceedings. Association for Computing Machinery. e Internacional de Educación Inclusiva, 11, 63–80. Available online at: https://
doi: 10.1145./3290605.3300276 revistaeducacioninclusiva.es/index.php/REI/article/view/384 (accessed February 3,
Flórez-Aristizábal, L., Cano, S., Collazos, C. A., Benavides, F., Moreira, F., and 2023).
Fardoun, H. M. (2019). Digital transformation to support literacy teaching to deaf Soleman, C., and Bousquat, A. (2021). Políticas de saúde e concepções de surdez e de
children: from storytelling to digital interactive storytelling. Telemat. Inform. 38, 87–99. deficiência auditiva no SUS: um monólogo? Health policies and definitions of deafness
doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2018.09.002 and hearing impairment in the SUS: a monologue? Cadernos de Saúde Públ. 37, 6620.
Gupta, M., Thakur, N., Bansal, D., Chaudhary, G., Davaasambuu, B., and Hua, doi: 10.1590./0102-311X00206620
Q. (2022). CNN-LSTM hybrid real-time IoT-based cognitive approaches for ISLR Sousa, C. S., Ferreira, D., and Rodrigues, C. L. (2019). Technologies for educating
with WebRTC: auditory impaired assistive technology. J. Healthc. Eng. 2022, 8627. deaf children—a systematic literature review. Brazilian Symposium on Computers
doi: 10.1155./2022/3978627 in Education (Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação - SBIE), 30, 1161.
Héder, M. (2017). From NASA to EU: the evolution of the TRL scale in Public doi: 10.5753/CBIE.SBIE.2019.1161
Sector Innovation - SZTAKI Publication Repository. The Innovation Journal, 22, 1–23. Spicer, J., Schmidt, R., Ward, C. D., and Pinnington, L. L. (2009). Evaluation of
Available at: https://eprints.sztaki.hu/9204/ (accessed June 21, 2022). text telephones designed for people with impaired hearing or speech. J. Med. Engin.
Hernández, C., Márquez, H., and Martínez, F. (2015). Technological Proposal for Technol. 29, 137–144. doi: 10.1080/03091900500067769
the Improvement of Education and Social Inclusion in the Deaf Children. Form. Su, M. C., Zhao, Y. X., and Chen, H. F. (2001). A fuzzy rule-based approach
Univer. 8, 107–120. doi: 10.4067/S0718-50062015000600013 to recognizing 3-D arm movements. IEEE Transact. Neural Sys. Rehabil. Engin. 9,
Hinman, R. T., Lupton, E. C., Leeb, S. B., Avestruz, A. T., Gilmore, R., Paul, D., et al. 191–201. doi: 10.1109/7333.928579
(2003). Using talking lights illumination-based communication networks to enhance Welch, V., Petticrew, M., Petkovic, J., Moher, D., Waters, E., White, H., et al.
word comprehension by people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Am. J. Audiol. 12, (2016). Extending the PRISMA statement to equity-focused systematic reviews
17–22. doi: 10.1044/1059-0889(2003/005) (PRISMA-E 2012): explanation and elaboration. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 70, 68–89.
Hutton, B., Catalá-López, F., and Moher, D. (2016). The PRISMA statement doi: 10.1016/J.JCLINEPI.09001
extension for systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analysis: PRISMA-NMA. Yaganoglu, M. (2021). Real time wearable speech recognition system for deaf
Medicina Clínica, 147, 262–266. doi: 10.1016/J.MEDCLE.10003 persons. Comp. Elect. Engin., 91. doi: 10.1016./j.compeleceng.2021.107026
Joy, J., Balakrishnan, K., and Madhavankutty, S. (2018). Developing a bilingual Zekveld, A. A., Kramer, S. E., Kessens, J. M., Vlaming, M. S., and Houtgast,
mobile dictionary for Indian Sign Language and gathering users experience T. (2008). User evaluation of a communication system that automatically
with SignDict. Assist. Technol. 32, 153–160. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2018.150 generates captions to improve telephone communication. Trends Hear. 13, 44–68.
8093 doi: 10.1177/1084713808330207

Frontiers in Education 10 frontiersin.org