Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31066702›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2019

A Speech-Enabled Fixed-Phrase Translator for Emergency Settings: Crossover Study.

Hervé Spechbach, Johanna Gerlach, Sanae Mazouri Karker, Nikos Tsourakis, Christophe Combescure, Pierrette Bouillon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hervé SpechbachGeneva University Hospitals, Genève, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7383-8531
Johanna GerlachFaculté de traduction et d'interprétation, Université de Genève, Genève, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3371-4021
Sanae Mazouri KarkerGeneva University Hospitals, Genève, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3754-8742
Nikos TsourakisFaculté de traduction et d'interprétation, Université de Genève, Genève, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4195-599X
Christophe CombescureGeneva University Hospitals, Genève, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2631-4780
Pierrette BouillonFaculté de traduction et d'interprétation, Université de Genève, Genève, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8854-6360
University of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the context of the current refugee crisis, emergency services often have to deal with patients who have no language in common with the staff. As interpreters are not always available, especially in emergency settings, medical personnel rely on alternative solutions such as machine translation, which raises reliability and data confidentiality issues, or medical fixed-phrase translators, which sometimes lack usability. A collaboration between Geneva University Hospitals and Geneva University led to the development of BabelDr, a new type of speech-enabled fixed-phrase translator. Similar to other fixed-phrase translators (such as Medibabble or UniversalDoctor), it relies on a predefined list of pretranslated sentences, but instead of searching for sentences in this list, doctors can freely ask questions.

objectiveThis study aimed to assess if a translation tool, such as BabelDr, can be used by doctors to perform diagnostic interviews under emergency conditions and to reach a correct diagnosis. In addition, we aimed to observe how doctors interact with the system using text and speech and to investigate if speech is a useful modality in this context.

methodsWe conducted a crossover study in December 2017 at Geneva University Hospitals with 12 French-speaking doctors (6 doctors working at the outpatient emergency service and 6 general practitioners who also regularly work in this service). They were asked to use the BabelDr tool to diagnose two standardized Arabic-speaking patients (one male and one female). The patients received a priori list of symptoms for the condition they presented with and were instructed to provide a negative or noncommittal answer for all other symptoms during the diagnostic interview. The male patient was standardized for nephritic colic and the female, for cystitis. Doctors used BabelDr as the only means of communication with the patient and were asked to make their diagnosis at the end of the dialogue. The doctors also completed a satisfaction questionnaire.

resultsAll doctors were able to reach the correct diagnosis based on the information collected using BabelDr. They all agreed that the system helped them reach a conclusion, even if one-half felt constrained by the tool and some considered that they could not ask enough questions to reach a diagnosis. Overall, participants used more speech than text, thus confirming that speech is an important functionality in this type of tool. There was a negative association (P=.02) between the percentage of successful speech interactions (spoken sentences sent for translation) and the number of translated text items, showing that the doctors used more text when they had no success with speech.

conclusionsIn emergency settings, when no interpreter is available, speech-enabled fixed-phrase translators can be a good alternative to reliably collect information from the patient.

Indexed as

anamnesisemergenciesfixed-phrase translatorspeech modalitytools for translation and interpreting

Identifiers

PMID31066702
PMCPMC6528434
OpenAlexW2937235422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.