Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2010
Comparing in-person, video, and telephonic medical interpretation.
Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
68 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 210 citations in OpenAlex.
- Access to Healthcare Among US Adult Refugees: A Systematic Qualitative Review.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2023Pooled it
- Professional Interpreter Services and the Impact on Hospital Care Outcomes: An Integrative Review of Literature.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- Definitions, survey methods, and findings of patient satisfaction studies in teledermatology: a systematic review.Archives of dermatological research · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Patterns and Predictors of Professional Interpreter Use in the Pediatric Emergency Department.Pediatrics · 2021Trial
- A randomized controlled trial of disclosing genetic risk information for Alzheimer disease via telephone.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2018Trial
- Effect of Telephone vs Video Interpretation on Parent Comprehension, Communication, and Utilization in the Pediatric Emergency Department: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA pediatrics · 2015Trial
- Language Barriers and Breast Reconstruction Decision-Making-A Literature Review and Exploratory Analysis.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Article
- Language access in the neonatal intensive care unit: inequities, legality, practice, and call to action.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- "Ich verstehe es nicht": the necessity of integrating professional interpretation into the German healthcare system.International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
- Effect of Language Interpreter Modalities on Patient Satisfaction and Clinical Workflow: A Pilot Study in a Multidisciplinary Pediatric Craniofacial Clinic.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026Article
- Investigating the Effect of Presentation Mode on Cognitive Load in English-Chinese Distance Simultaneous Interpreting: An Eye-Tracking Study.Journal of eye movement research · 2025Article
- Evaluating professional interpreting services for patients with limited English proficiency in secondary care settings: a scoping review.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Identifying and breaking barriers: Addressing disparities in the care of patients with gynecologic cancers.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
- Discharge Interventions for Limited English Proficiency Patients: A Scoping Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- Comparing remote and in-person interpretation experiences for clinicians and Spanish-speaking patients with limited English proficiency: a mixed methods study.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Descriptive analysis of interpreter service mode costs & usage in Northwestern Wisconsin pre and peri COVID-19.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Working experiences of remote interpreters in health care settings-insights from Austria and Germany.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Navigating Complexities In Randomized Trials: Insights From The EMERGE Trial Amidst Pandemic And Cybersecurity Threat.HRB open research · 2025Article
- Respectful maternity care experiences of South Asian refugees in the US: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUsing trained interpreters to provide medical interpretation services is superior to services provided on an ad hoc basis, but little is known about the effectiveness of providing their services remotely, especially using video.
objectiveTo compare remote medical interpretation services by trained interpreters via telephone and videoconference to those provided in-person.
designQuasi-randomized control study.
participantsTwo hundred and forty-one Spanish speaking patient volunteers, twenty-four health providers, and seven interpreters. APPROACH: Patients, providers and interpreters each independently completed scales evaluating the quality of clinical encounters and, optionally, made free text comments. Interviews were conducted with 23 of the providers, the seven interpreters, and a subset of 30 patients. Time data were collected.
resultsEncounters with in-person interpretation were rated significantly higher by providers and interpreters, while patients rated all methods the same. There were no significant differences in provider and interpreter ratings of remote methods. Provider and interpreter comments on scales and interview data support the higher in-person ratings, but they also showed a distinct preference for video over the phone. Phone interviews were significantly shorter than in-person. DISCUSSION: Patients rated interpretation services highly no matter how they were provided but experienced only the method employed at the time of the encounter. Providers and interpreters were exposed to all three methods, were more critical of remote methods, and preferred videoconferencing to the telephone as a remote method. The significantly shorter phone interviews raise questions about the prospects of miscommunication in telephonic interpretation, given the absence of a visual channel, but other factors might have affected time results. Since the patient population studied was Hispanic and predominantly female care must be taken in generalizing these results to other populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.