ReviewJournal of immigrant and minority health2026
Evaluating the Multilingual Accessibility of Health Websites for Immigrants and Ethnic Minorities: A Methodological Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of immigrant and minority health, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Offering multilingual options on health websites is crucial, as it facilitates access to online health information for immigrants and ethnic minorities. In response to the necessity of research in this field and the growing scholarly interest, this study reviewed recent empirical studies on the multilingual accessibility of health websites to offer methodological insights into this research field while highlighting existing research gaps. Three databases, namely, Web of Science, PubMed, and CINAHL, were searched for studies published between 1 March 2014 and 1 March 2024. Fifty-three eligible studies were included. Data were extracted from nine dimensions and synthesized to address four research questions: conceptual orientations, research gaps, research pathways, and website selection methods. The data synthesis revealed that: (i) research gaps exist, particularly with COVID-19 as the predominant health topic; (ii) the reviewed studies were geographically focused on only 12 regions, with the United States receiving the most extensive attention (54.5%); (iii) only 16 studies (30.2%) specifically targeted immigrants or ethnic minorities; (iv) only five different languages appeared as source languages of the studied websites, and 86.8% of studies focused on websites originally prepared in English; and (v) common criteria for evaluating multilingual accessibility included the presence of multilingual options, languages offered, translation methods, and the quantity of multilingual information. This review offers insights into the research gaps and methodologies for evaluating the multilingual accessibility of health websites. Future studies could focus on empirical research across diverse health websites, regions, and language pairs. A ready-to-use checklist of criteria for evaluating multilingual accessibility is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41774375What 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.