ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2019
Challenges and opportunities caring for neurology outpatients across language differences.
Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Linguistic Barriers in U.S. Neuropsychological Assessment: A State-of-the-Art Review.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2026Review
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
Abstract
backgroundWith over 66 million Americans who speak over 350 languages other than English at home, we sought to examine attitudes and behaviors of neurology clinicians and staff when communicating across language differences.
methodsWe conducted an electronic-enabled cross-sectional survey of clinicians and patient services coordinators working at an academic neurology outpatient clinic. Questions focused on professional medical interpreter (PMI) services usage, satisfaction, and perceived barriers to utilization.
resultsA total of 82/235 (35%) neurology clinicians and 24/52 (46%) coordinators met the study eligibility criteria. Most clinicians (96%) reported seeing at least 1 non-English-speaking patient and using PMI services (85%) in the last month. Most commonly self-reported interpretation modalities were face-to-face PMI services (39%) and patients' family members or friends (28%). Perceived barriers to using PMI included time constraints (60%) and lack of available face-to-face PMI (51%). Among patient services coordinators, 33% reported consistently asking patients their preferred language and 50% if they needed a PMI for appointments. Most respondents (77% clinicians and 71% coordinators) were satisfied with PMI services. Recommendations included having more available face-to-face PMI, greater coordinated efforts to preschedule PMI, and more education on the effective use of PMI.
conclusionsMore than 70% of outpatient neurology clinicians and patient services coordinators were satisfied with PMI. However, their perceived barriers and reported practices suggest a need for updated policies and education to improve the use of PMI services.
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.