ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2023
Results of Anorectal Physiological Testing in Patients with Limited English Proficiency.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Speaking Their Language: Gastrointestinal Testing in Patients with Limited English Proficiency.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with limited English proficiency (LEP) experience barriers to healthcare. These include language barriers and difficulty accessing medical subspecialties. Consequently, patients with LEP may be underrepresented, and may be more likely to have abnormal results, among individuals referred for anorectal testing.
aimsTo explore whether differences exist in the results of high-resolution anorectal manometry (HRM), rectal sensory testing (RST), and balloon expulsion testing (BET) between patients with LEP and English proficiency (EP).
methodsThe electronic health records at Mayo Clinic, Rochester were used to identify constipated patients without organic anorectal disease who had undergone anorectal testing in 2018, 2019, and 2020. The language spoken by the patients was determined. HRM, RST, and BET results were compared. Nominal logistic regression explored the influence of age, gender, test operator, and LEP on the likelihood of abnormal findings. KEY
resultsAmong 3298 patients (80% female, mean age ± standard deviation 46 ± 16 years), 67 (2%) had LEP. HRM measurements were similar in LEP and EP patients. However, LEP patients were more likely to have abnormal BET and RST. Logistic regression revealed that age (older than 50 years), gender, test operator, and LEP influenced the results of BET and RST, with LEP having the strongest influence.
conclusionsResults of anorectal testing in constipated patients differ between LEP and EP patients. This is likely to represent a difference in disease prevalence between these groups, for example, due to referral bias, rather than a difference in physiology or a language barrier.
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.