ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Influence of primary language on follow-up after emergency department visits for acute renal colic: evidence from an ethnically diverse urban cohort.
Article in World journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Language preference or navigation structure? Interpreting follow-up disparities after emergency department visits for acute renal colic.World journal of urology · 2026Article
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
purposeWe aimed to determine whether preferred language influences follow-up for patients diagnosed with nephrolithiasis in the emergency department (ED).
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed patients referred from an ED to our clinic for symptomatic nephrolithiasis from 12/2021 to 6/2024. Patients were stratified by preferred language (English speakers [ES] vs. Non-English speakers [NES]) and compared across time to office visit, time to surgery, 24-hour urine collection, ED revisits, and failure to undergo surgery. Multivariate linear regression of log-transformed time to follow-up determined factors influencing time from ED to office visit.
resultsWe identified 255 ES vs. 112 NES. Mandarin (44%), Cantonese (21%), and Spanish (18%) speakers comprised most of the NES cohort. NES experienced longer time to office visit (32.6 vs. 20.9 days, p < 0.001) and more ED revisits (16.1% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.02). There were no differences in time to surgery (24.8 vs. 22.3 days, p = 0.10), collection of 24-hour urine sample (22.3% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.25), or failure to undergo surgery (12.3% vs. 12.2%, p = 1.0). On multivariate regression, NES was independently associated with delayed follow-up (β = 2.49, 95% CI [1.63, 3.80], p < 0.001). On subgroup analysis, Spanish speakers had significantly longer follow-up delays than English (p < 0.001) and Chinese speakers (p = 0.003), while Chinese and English speakers did not differ (p = 0.57).
conclusionsAfter an ED presentation for nephrolithiasis, NES have delayed urologic follow-up and more ED revisits than ES, with subgroup analysis identifying Spanish speakers as the most affected group. Targeted interventions and language-concordant care models may reduce these disparities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42565869What 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.