Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39604912›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2024

Uptake and experience of professional interpreting services in primary care in a South Asian population: a national cross-sectional study.

G Hieke, E D Williams, P Gill, G B Black, L Islam, C Vindrola-Padros, J Yargawa, S Braun, K L Whitaker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

G HiekeCentre for Translation Studies, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
E D WilliamsDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
P GillWarwick Applied Health, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK.
G B BlackWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
L IslamPatient and Public Involvement, London, UK.
C Vindrola-PadrosDepartment of Targeted Intervention, University College London, London, UK.
J YargawaWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
S BraunCentre for Translation Studies, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
K L WhitakerSchool of Health Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK. k.whitaker@surrey.ac.uk.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR134866
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterpreting services bridge language barriers that may prevent patients and clinicians from understanding each other, impacting quality of care and health outcomes. Despite this, there is limited up-to-date evidence regarding the barriers to and facilitators of uptake in primary care. The aim of this study was to ascertain current national uptake and experience of interpreting services in primary care (general practice) by South Asian communities in England.

methodsWe conducted a national cross-sectional survey in 2023 with people with limited or no English language proficiency (n = 609). Multilingual researchers interviewed people from Bangladeshi (n = 213), Indian (n = 200), and Pakistani (n = 196) backgrounds from four regions in England (Greater London, Midlands, Yorkshire and the Humber, North West).

resultsSixty-three percent of participants reported using professional interpreting services in primary care. The most common modality was face-to-face interpreting (55%), followed by telephone (17%) and video (8%). Multivariable analysis identified several correlates of lower uptake: participants from Indian backgrounds, those living in the Midlands, and those whose family member/friend interpreted for them within the past year were less likely to have used a professional interpreter provided by their general/family practice. Participants who had visited primary care within the last 12 months, had requested an interpreter but were told they could not have one, were informed about professional interpreting services, and were given choice in their language support were more likely to have used a professional interpreter.

conclusionsOur approach provides novel data on professional interpreting service use and evidence about the factors that may play a role in patient uptake and experience.

Indexed as

Communication BarriersPrimary Health CareAdolescentAdultAgedBangladeshCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandFemaleHumansIndiaMaleMiddle AgedPakistanTranslatingYoung AdultGeneral practiceHealth inequitiesInterpretingLanguage barriersPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID39604912
PMCPMC11600964

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.