ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
The impact of language discordance on genetic counselors' ability to establish a working alliance with patients.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2025. 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.
- The impact of language discordance on genetic counselors' ability to establish a working alliance with patients.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
We explored the impact of language discordance (LD) on quality of care by asking genetic counselors (GCs) about their perception of how their lack of proficiency in a patient's language affects their sessions. We hypothesized that contracting, which relies on ongoing, bidirectional communication between GC and patient, is particularly vulnerable to LD. Specifically, we evaluated the impact of dialogue engagement (whether GCs ranked dialogue as more one-sided/rigid or more interactive/conversational), time sufficiency (how adequate the GCs ranked the time allotted for the session), and interpreter-related factors (experience and relationship with interpreters; perceived ability and knowledge of how to work with interpreters) on GCs' perceived ability to contract in LD sessions. Forty-five GCs recruited from the NSGC listserv completed a 42-item survey exploring these topics through reflection on their most recent LD and language concordant (LC) sessions. The outcome measure of "perceived contracting success" was defined based on five practice-based competencies. Results were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed ranks tests and linear regressions and found that GCs' perceived (1) contracting success, (2) dialogue engagement, and (3) time sufficiency were significantly lower in LD sessions (p < 0.001 for all 3). Perceived contracting success in LD sessions had a positive relationship with both perceived dialogue engagement and perceived time sufficiency (r
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.