SynthesisThe Laryngoscope2025
Disparities in Adult Otolaryngology Patients with Limited English Proficiency: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in The Laryngoscope, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neighborhood Deprivation and Voice and Reflux Symptom Burden in a Tertiary Laryngology Cohort.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Language access barriers in behavioral health service access and continuity for Spanish-speaking adults: a multi-setting qualitative health services study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Impact of Limited English Proficiency on the Presentation and Management of Vestibular Schwannomas.OTO openArticle
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
objectiveLimited English proficiency (LEP) has become increasingly recognized as an independent predictor of adverse health outcomes in the United States. We aim to examine trends and summarize current insights into LEP-related disparities in adult otolaryngology. DATA SOURCES: Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus.
methodsA systematic review of US-based, peer-reviewed literature evaluating outcomes in adult otolaryngology across primary language or varying levels of English proficiency; results were analyzed for study design, subspecialty, cohort demographics, and outcomes; findings were further assessed with the Kilbourne conceptual framework for health care disparities.
resultsAn initial search yielded 3886 articles. After removal of duplicates, 2906 articles were screened and 31 studies were included after full-text analysis. Head and Neck Oncology (25.8%) and Otology (16.1%) were the most highly represented subspecialty topics. Patients with LEP represented an average of 21.71% (Range 2.21% - 51%) of the study populations. Definitions of LEP were variable. Furthermore, studies specifying patient-reported LEP status reported significant findings more often than those using electronic health record-derived data (p < 0.01). Under the Kilbourne framework, all studies were "detecting" (N = 21, 67.7%) and "understanding" (N = 10, 32.3%) disparities. In outcomes-focused studies, patients with LEP presented with a higher burden of oncologic disease, more severe hearing loss, and disparities in treatment access/implementation.
conclusionPatients with LEP are adversely impacted across various otolaryngology subspecialties. Defining these inequities is vital to provide more targeted and comprehensive care for patients with LEP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 135:1248-1258, 2025.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.