ArticleMedical care2020
Association of Primary Language and Hospitalization for Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions.
Article in Medical care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Association of Language Barriers With Perioperative and Surgical Outcomes: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2023Pooled it
- Using Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions to Assess Primary Health Care Performance during Disasters: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Limited English Proficiency and Clinical Outcomes After Hospital-Based Care in English-Speaking Countries: a Systematic Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Outcomes Among Patients with Systolic Heart Failure and Limited English Proficiency.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2026Article
- Multilingualism in Psychotherapists in Training in Germany: Results of a Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study.Transcultural psychiatry · 2026Article
- The Impact of Limited English Proficiency on Healthcare Access and Outcomes in the U.S.: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Differences in Telemedicine, Emergency Department, and Hospital Utilization Among Nonelderly Adults with Limited English Proficiency Post-COVID-19 Pandemic: a Cross-Sectional Analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Language-Specific Challenges and Solutions for Equitable Telemedicine Implementation in the Primary Care Safety Net During COVID-19.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Perspectives from leadership and frontline staff on telehealth transitions in the Los Angeles safety net during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Article
- Limited English Proficient Patient Visits and Emergency Department Admission Rates for Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions in California: a Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLimited English proficiency is associated with decreased access to ambulatory care, however, it is unclear if this disparity leads to increased use of emergency departments (EDs) for low severity ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs).
objectiveWe sought to determine the association between the patient's preferred language and hospital utilization for ACSCs. RESEARCH
designWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of all ED visits in New Jersey in 2013 and 2014. The primary outcome was hospital admission for acute ACSCs, chronic ACSCs, and fractures (a nonambulatory care sensitive control condition). Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) utilization and length of stay. Mixed-effect regression models estimated the association between preferred language (English vs. non-English) and study outcomes, controlling for demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics.
resultsWe examined 201,351 ED visits for acute ACSCs, 251,193 visits for chronic ACSCs, and 148,428 visits for fractures, of which 13.5%, 11.1%, and 9.9%, respectively, were by non-English speakers. In adjusted analyses, non-English speakers were less likely to be admitted for acute ACSCs [-3.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI), -3.6% to -2.5%] and chronic ACSCs (-2.3%; 95% CI, -2.8% to -1.7%) but not fractures (0.4%; 95% CI, -0.2% to 1.0%). Among hospitalized patients, non-English speakers were less likely to receive ICU services but had no difference in length of stay.
conclusionsThese findings suggest non-English-speaking patients may seek ED care for lower acuity ACSCs than English-speaking patients. Efforts to decrease preventable ED and increase access to ambulatory care use should consider the needs of non-English-speaking patients.
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.