ReviewThe western journal of emergency medicine2025
Narrative Review of Emergency Medicine Clinical Research Examining Exclusion by Language.
Review in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2025. 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
introductionOver 20% of the United States population speaks a language other than English, and many use the emergency department (ED) to access healthcare. However, there remains concern that patients preferring languages other than English are under-represented in clinical research. Thus, our goal was to assess the proportion of ED studies that excluded patients for recruitment due to language.
methodsWe conducted a narrative review using seven search engines for 2018-2023. We included studies if they mentioned language of participants and prospectively enrolled patients in an ED or prehospital setting. We excluded studies if they only included patients <18 years and/or were conducted exclusively outside the US. Two independent reviewers reviewed studies. Analyses included descriptive statistics.
resultsOf the 10,513 studies we identified, 281 were eligible for review; 163 (58%) excluded non-English language preferred (NELP) patients. Among the 107 interventional studies, 69% excluded NELP patients. Of the 135 studies focused on health equity/social emergency medicine, 47% excluded NELP patients.
conclusionWe found 163 (58%) studies conducted in the ED that mention language and excluded NELP patients. Additional work is needed to encourage and support inclusive study designs.
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.