ReviewInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2023
Cultural brokering in pregnancy care: A critical review.
Review in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cultural Brokering in Pregnancy Care: A Qualitative Study.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2026Article
- Leveraging human centered design to enhance clinician communication during pregnancy care: Overcoming language barriers with Spanish-speaking patients.PEC innovation · 2025Article
- Perspectives of women and partners from migrant and refugee backgrounds accessing the Cross Cultural Worker Service in maternity and early childhood services-a survey study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
People who speak languages other than English face structural barriers in accessing the US healthcare system. With a growing number of people living in countries other than their countries of birth, the impact of language and cultural differences between patients and care teams on quality care is global. Cultural brokering presents a unique opportunity to enhance communication and trust between patients and clinicians from different cultural backgrounds during pregnancy care-a critical window for engaging families in the healthcare system. This critical review aims to synthesize literature describing cultural brokering in pregnancy care. We searched keywords relating to cultural brokering, pregnancy, and language in PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL and traced references of screened articles. Our search identified 33 articles. We found that cultural brokering is not clearly defined in the current literature. Few of the articles provided information about language concordance between cultural brokers and patients or clinicians. No article described the impact of cultural brokering on health outcomes. Facilitators of cultural brokering included: interprofessional collaboration within the care team, feeling a family connection between the cultural broker and patients, and cultivating trust between the cultural broker and clinicians. Barriers to cultural brokering included: misunderstanding the responsibilities, difficulty maintaining personal boundaries, and limited availability and accessibility of cultural brokers. We propose cultural brokering as interactions that cover four key aims: (1) language support; (2) bridging cultural differences; (3) social support and advocacy; and (4) navigation of the healthcare system. Clinicians, researchers, and policymakers should develop consistent language around cultural brokering in pregnancy care and examine the impact of cultural brokers on health outcomes.
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.