ArticleJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2023
Evaluating Patient and Family Experience Among Spanish-Speaking and LatinX Patients: a Scoping Review of Existing Instruments.
Article in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLatinX populations are rapidly growing in the USA, but still report lower levels of patient centered care and satisfaction when compared to their non-LatinX white counterparts. This review encompasses literature which describes patient experience instruments that (1) evaluate LatinX experience, (2) have validated Spanish versions, or (3) measure language-concordant care experiences.
methodsA scoping review of literature in Ovid Medline, CINAHL, and PsycINFO was conducted. Articles were excluded if they were not applicable to the health care industry, did not include a patient experience instrument, or did not include LatinX or Spanish-speaking individuals within their study population. Data extraction was performed for concepts measured, study size, population, health care setting, and languages validated.
resultsThis review identified 224 manuscripts. Of these, 81 met full inclusion criteria and represented 60 unique instruments. These covered six categories: general patient experience (43%, n = 26/60), experiences of discrimination/mistrust (12%, n = 7/60), cultural factors (10%, n = 6/60), patient-provider relationship (10%, n = 6/60), and communication (8%, n = 5/60). The remaining instruments measured multiple categories (17%, n = 10/60). Just over one third of instruments (n = 24, 5 pediatric, 19 adult) were validated in Spanish and an additional 14 (23%) were validated in English alone. Finally, 4 (7%) instruments were identified which were developed for use in a language concordant setting.
conclusionMany instruments were identified which evaluate LatinX patient experience; however, none was both validated in Spanish and measured in all key categories of experience described above. Additionally, few instruments were developed for holistic evaluation of patient experience in pediatric or language concordant care settings.
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.