Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40919538›Full record

ArticlePalliative medicine reports2025

Quality of Serious Illness Communication with Hospitalized Limited English Proficient Patients: A Mixed Methods Study.

Laura M Holdsworth, Samantha M R Kling, Marcy Winget, Heather Z Mui, Donn W Garvert, Darlene Veruttipong, Briththa Seevaratnam, Sonia Harris, Winifred Teuteberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Palliative medicine reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Laura M HoldsworthDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Samantha M R KlingDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Marcy WingetDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Heather Z MuiDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Donn W GarvertDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Darlene VeruttipongDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Briththa SeevaratnamDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Sonia HarrisDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Winifred TeutebergDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Serious Illness Conversation Guide was developed to support high quality goals of care conversations with seriously ill patients; however, guide implementation for patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) has not been studied. This evaluation aimed to explore serious illness conversations with hospitalized LEP patients, defined as those with a non-English language documented, from clinician and interpreter perspectives; and assess differences in documentation in the electronic medical record (EMR) as a quality improvement effort. Methods: Parallel mixed methods evaluation including thematic analysis of observations and interviews with medical interpreters ( Results: Six themes characterized serious illness communication and guide use with LEP patients. As compared to other clinical encounters, both interpreters and clinicians perceived serious illness communication as unique. Both groups acknowledged that interpreters convey meaning, though being an effective voice of the clinician required advanced preparation of the interpreter, even when the guide was used. There were no differences in documentation between the groups (4.7% (345/7396) versus 5.4% (126/2326); Conclusions: Even when the guide is used, there may be differences in serious illness communication quality with LEP patients depending on how clinicians engage with the guide and interpreter preparation. The guide may be a method to enhance communication quality, but for LEP patients, requires the parallel implementation of workflows that support high-quality communication.

Indexed as

advance care planninghealth communicationinpatientsLimited English proficiencyqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID40919538
PMCPMC12410327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.