MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378172252 · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000005919

Non-English Primary Language

2023· article· en· W4378172252 on OpenAlexaff
Emna Bakillah, James Sharpe, Jason Tong, Matthew Goldshore, Jon B. Morris, Rachel R. Kelz

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Economics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioCholecystectomyRetrospective cohort studyOddsLimited English proficiencyPopulationFirst languagePoisson regressionLanguage proficiencyHealth careLogistic regressionEmergency medicineGeneral surgerySurgeryInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine access to cholecystectomy and postoperative outcomes among non-English primary-speaking patients. BACKGROUND: The population of U.S. residents with limited English proficiency is growing. Language affects health literacy and is a well-recognized barrier to health care in the United States of America. Historically marginalized communities are at greater risk of requiring emergent gallbladder operations. However, little is known about how primary language affects surgical access and outcomes of common surgical procedures, such as cholecystectomy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients after receipt of cholecystectomy in Michigan, Maryland, and New Jersey utilizing the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database and State Ambulatory Surgery and Services Database (2016-2018). Patients were classified by primary spoken language: English or non-English. The primary outcome was admission type. Secondary outcomes included operative setting, operative approach, in-hospital mortality, postoperative complications, and length of stay. Multivariable logistics and Poisson regression were used to examine outcomes. RESULTS: Among 122,013 patients who underwent cholecystectomy, 91.6% were primarily English speaking and 8.4% were non-English primary language speaking. Primary non-English speaking patients had a higher likelihood of emergent/urgent admissions (odds ratio: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.04-1.44, P = 0.015) and a lower likelihood of having an outpatient operation (odds ratio: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.91, P = 0.0008). There was no difference in the use of a minimally invasive approach or postoperative outcomes based on the primary language spoken. CONCLUSIONS: Non-English primary language speakers were more likely to access cholecystectomy through the emergency department and less likely to receive outpatient cholecystectomy. Barriers to elective surgical presentation for this growing patient population need to be further studied.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.352
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.149 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of SurgerySame topicInterpreting and Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207