Cited by 91

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A survey of language barriers from the perspective of pediatric oncologists, interpreters, and parents

Abbe, Marisa, Simon, Christian, Angiolillo, Anne, Ruccione, Kathy, Kodish, Eric D·2006·Pediatric Blood & Cancer

Abstract

Background: Oncologists in the US increasingly face the challenge of communicating with non‐English speaking parents of children with cancer. This study explores this challenge from the perspectives of a sample of pediatric oncologists, interpreters, and Spanish‐speaking parents of children with newly diagnosed leukemia. Procedure: Thirty‐seven oncologists and 17 professional language interpreters based at two non‐profit pediatric hospitals in the US were surveyed on the topic of language barriers in pediatric care. Seventeen parents who communicated with their child's oncologist through an interpreter were also surveyed. Results: All groups expressed considerable concern over the process of communicating across a language barrier. For oncologists, these concerns included the accuracy and completeness of interpretations, complexity of information, and loss of confidence and control over the communication process. For interpreters, they included complexity of information, information overload, and lack of clinician sensitivity toward the cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds of limited English proficiency (LEP) families. Parent concerns included difficulties comprehending information and anxiety over the possibility of missing out on important information. All groups provided multiple suggestions for improving communication across a language barrier. Conclusions: Oncologists, interpreters, and parents expressed considerable concern over the process of communicating across a language barrier. Some of these concerns could be minimized through efforts to boost interpreter accuracy and completeness, including the use of more simple, easy to understand language. Other issues, such as differences in culture and socioeconomic background, warrant consideration of the intercultural knowledge and skills of interpreters. Pediatric Blood Cancer 2006;47:819–824. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pbc.20841

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. 10.1542/peds.105.1.27 · DOI
  2. 10.1207/s15327027hc1701_6 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00234-3 · DOI
  4. 10.1542/peds.111.1.6 · DOI
  5. 10.1200/JCO.2004.10.034 · DOI
  6. 10.1097/00005650-199810000-00004 · DOI
  7. 10.1542/peds.111.5.e569 · DOI
  8. 10.1176/ajp.137.12.1530 · DOI
  9. 10.1001/jama.291.4.470 · DOI
  10. 10.1200/JCO.2003.03.003 · DOI
  11. Simon C, Interpreted informed consent among Spanish‐speaking families with cancer, J Health Commun
  12. Creswell JW, 2003, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches
  13. 10.1080/714044490 · DOI
  14. Perkins J, 2003, Ensuring linguistic access in health care settings: An overview of current legal rights and responsibilities
  15. 10.1016/0277-9536(84)90092-3 · DOI
  16. 10.1007/978-1-4899-1936-6_4 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Abbe, M., Simon, C., Angiolillo, A., Ruccione, K., & Kodish, E. D.
Venue
Pediatric Blood & Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-04-13
Volume
47
Issue
6
Pages
819-824
ISSN
  • 1545-5009
  • 1545-5017
Cited by
91
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review