Mixed-methods study examines awareness and access to speech and language services post-earthquake, indicating critical service gaps.
This study examines societal awareness levels, service access barriers, and policy gaps regarding speech and language disorders (SLD) after the February 6, 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes, utilizing a mixed-methods approach. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was employed. A quantitative survey was conducted with 450 participants via stratified cluster sampling across four severely affected provinces. This was followed by qualitative in-depth interviews with 30 participants selected through purposive maximum variation sampling, using a semi-structured interview guide informed by the quantitative findings. 59.3% of participants observed at least one SLD symptom in their families, yet only 19.5% received a formal diagnosis and 14.2% consulted a speech-language therapist. The mean awareness score was 41.2/75. Significant predictors of awareness included educational attainment (β = 0.312), presence of SLD symptoms (β = 0.241), and loss of a close relative (β = 0.211). Qualitative themes highlighted fear of stigmatization, lack of service awareness, prioritization issues, and weak system coordination. A critical service gap exists in post-disaster SLD care in Türkiye. The findings suggest that the integration of SLD screening into disaster response systems, the strengthening of tele-therapy infrastructure, and the implementation of targeted community awareness initiatives may help improve access to speech–language services in post-disaster contexts. Public health relevance—How does this work relate to a public health issue? Public health significance—Why is this work of significance to public health? Public health implications—What are the key implications or messages for practitioners, policy makers and/or researchers in public health?
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Şimşek et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: