ArticlePloS one2011
The unmet need for interpreting provision in UK primary care.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring health inequalities by language proficiency; A routine health records study set in England.PloS one · 2026Article
- Providing care to marginalised communities: a qualitative study of community pharmacy teams.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Article
- Building an understanding of Ethnic minority people's Service Use Relating to Emergency care for injuries: the BE SURE study protocol.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Project20: interpreter services for pregnant women with social risk factors in England: what works, for whom, in what circumstances, and how?International journal for equity in health · 2021Article
- Newly Arrived Migrant Women's Experience of Maternity Health Information: A Face-to-Face Questionnaire Study in Norway.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- What do primary care staff know and do about blood borne virus testing and care for migrant patients? A national survey.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Healthcare service delivery to refugee children from the Democratic Republic of Congo living in Durban, South Africa: a caregivers' perspective.BMC medicine · 2018Article
- The role of spoken language in cardiovascular health inequalities: a cross-sectional study of people with non-English language preference.BJGP open · 2018Article
- Experiences of primary care professionals providing healthcare to recently arrived migrants: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2016Article
- Training healthcare professionals to work with interpreters.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2013Article
- A specialist clinic for destitute asylum seekers and refugees in London.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012Article
- Implementation of new Healthy Conversation Skills to support lifestyle changes - what helps and what hinders? Experiences of Sure Start Children's Centre staff.Health & social care in the community · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith increasing globalisation, the challenges of providing accessible and safe healthcare to all are great. Studies show that there are substantial numbers of people who are not fluent in English to a level where they can make best use of health services. We examined how health professionals manage language barriers in a consultation. METHODS AND
findingsThis was a cross-sectional study in 41 UK general practices . Health professionals completed a proforma for a randomly allocated consultation session. Seventy-seven (63%) practitioners responded, from 41(59%) practices. From 1008 consultations, 555 involved patients who did not have English as a first language; 710 took place in English; 222 were in other languages, the practitioner either communicating with the patient in their own language/using an alternative language. Seven consultations were in a mixture of English/patient's own language. Patients' first languages numbered 37 (apart from English), in contrast to health practitioners, who declared at least a basic level of proficiency in 22 languages other than English. The practitioner's reported proficiency in the language used was at a basic level in 24 consultations, whereas in 21, they reported having no proficiency at all. In 57 consultations, a relative/friend interpreted and in 6, a bilingual member of staff/community worker was used. Only in 6 cases was a professional interpreter booked. The main limitation was that only one random session was selected and assessment of patient/professional fluency in English was subjective.
conclusionsIt would appear that professional interpreters are under-used in relation to the need for them, with bilingual staff/family and friends being used commonly. In many cases where the patient spoke little/no English, the practitioner consulted in the patient's language but this approach was also used where reported practitioner proficiency was low. Further research in different setting is needed to substantiate these findings.
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.