ArticleSurgery open science2024
Early use of professional interpreters improves trauma outcomes: Results of a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Surgery open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) experience reduced pain assessment and treatment, less comprehensive physical exams, and fewer explanations of the next steps in care. These disparities persist in hospitals with staffed professional interpreters, raising questions about interpreter access and the impact on outcomes. A retrospective review of 1133 trauma activations at a single center Level 1 Trauma Center in 2021-2022 was conducted. Demographic, injury, and outcome data were drawn from the institutional trauma registry, and patient-preferred language was pulled from EMR data. Early interpreter use was defined as documentation of professional interpreter use within 24 h of arrival. LOS and ICU LOS were compared between language groups using Cox regression, and mortality was compared using Fischer's exact test. 1114 patients had data available on initial injury severity and preferred language. Of the 70 LEP patients, 62 (88.6 %) required an interpreter, and 41 of those (66.1 %) had evidence of professional interpreter use within 24 h of arrival. LEP patients who lacked early interpreter use had longer hospital stays than both English proficient (EP) patients (HR 0.59,
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.