Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23811170›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2013

Improving ethnic monitoring for telephone-based healthcare: a conversation analytic study.

Geraldine M Leydon, Katie Ekberg, Moira Kelly, Paul Drew

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Geraldine M LeydonPrimary Medical Care and Population Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Katie Ekberg
Moira Kelly
Paul Drew

Funding

Department of Health PDF-2009-02-35
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMedical and healthcare organisations-including the national cancer support and helpline organisation that is the subject of this study-are expected to collect and monitor information about the ethnicity of their client populations. Information about ethnicity is important for a variety of reasons, including monitoring need and targeting healthcare services appropriately. Previous survey and interview research has suggested that collecting ethnicity data from service users can be incomplete and of variable quality-pointing to a need for an improved understanding of the (interactional) difficulties involved when call-handlers ask callers about their ethnicity.

designThis study analyses a corpus of real-life audio-recorded calls to a national cancer helpline in the UK, focusing on the way that call-handlers collect the ethnic monitoring data.

settingA major national cancer helpline in the UK.

participantsA sample of 273 recorded calls were recorded, of which 267 were frontline calls in which call-handlers are expected to ask the ethnicity monitoring question.

resultsFindings suggest that caller uncertainty about how to answer the question, resistance to answering and call-handler presumption can compromise the effectiveness of ethnic monitoring. It is likely to be improved by changing how the ethnicity monitoring question is asked. Changes include avoiding open question formats to ease caller uncertainty; offering callers a rationale (account) for the question to minimise resistance and confirming the accuracy of the ethnic category recorded.

conclusionsWe recommend that telephone-based healthcare personnel avoid asking the ethnicity monitoring question in an 'open' format; instead, a question containing a (short) standardised list can assist callers in responding. A training tool has been developed that applies this and other findings, with a view to improving ethnic monitoring.

Indexed as

Health Services Administration & ManagementPublic HealthQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID23811170
PMCPMC3696874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.