MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399297798 · doi:10.1136/bmjph-2023-000762

Impact of patient–family physician language concordance on healthcare utilisation and mortality: a retrospective cohort study of home care recipients in Ontario, Canada

2024· article· en· W4399297798 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Michael Reaume, Ricardo Batista, Ewa Sucha, Michael Pugliese, Rhiannon Roberts, Emily Rhodes, Emily Seale, Claire Kendall, Lise M. Bjerre, Louise Bouchard, Sharon Johnston, Manish M. Sood, Denis Prud’homme, Douglas G. Manuel, Peter Tanuseputro

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsInstitut du Savoir MontfortBruyèreUniversity of OttawaUniversity of ManitobaOttawa HospitalUniversité de MonctonInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
FundersInstitut du savoir Montfort-Recherche
KeywordsConcordanceMedicineRetrospective cohort studyHealth careCohortFamily medicineGerontologyPediatricsInternal medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: As the world's linguistic diversity continues to increase at an unprecedented rate, a growing proportion of patients will be at risk of experiencing language barriers in primary care settings. We sought to examine whether patient-family physician language concordance in a primary care setting is associated with lower rates of hospital-based healthcare utilisation and mortality. Methods: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of 497 227 home care recipients living in Ontario, Canada. Patient language was obtained from home care assessments while physician language was obtained from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. We defined primary care as language concordant when patients and their rostered family physicians shared a mutually intelligible language, and we defined all other primary care as language discordant. The primary outcomes were Emergency Department (ED) visits, hospitalisations and death within 1 year of index home care assessment. Results: Compared with non-English, non-French speakers who received language-discordant primary care, those who received language-concordant primary care experienced fewer ED visits (53.1% vs 57.5%; p<0.01), fewer hospitalisations (35.0% vs 37.6%; p<0.01) and less mortality (14.4% vs 16.6%; p<0.01) during the study period. In multivariable regression analyses, non-English, non-French speakers had lower risks of ED visits (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.94), hospitalisations (aHR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.98) and death (aHR 0.87, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.93) when they received language-concordant primary care. For francophones, the risk of experiencing an ED visit, a hospitalisation or death was not impacted by the language of their family physician. Conclusions: Patient-family physician language concordance is associated with a lower risk of adverse outcomes in non-English and non-French speakers. Optimising the delivery of language-concordant care could potentially result in significant decreases in the use of acute healthcare services and mortality at the population level.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Public HealthSame topicInterpreting and Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207