Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-25 @ 2:16 AM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-26 @ 12:46 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT03538860
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2021-10-14
First Post:
2018-03-01
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
False
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Validation of an Automated Online Language Interpreting Tool - Phase Two.
Sponsor:
University of California, Davis
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
A Clinical Trial to Validate an Automated Online Language Interpreting Tool With Hispanic Patients Who Have Limited English Proficiency - Phase Two.
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2021-10
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
There is a pressing national need to provide higher-quality, more effectively accessible language interpretation services to improve the health outcomes of Americans who have limited English proficiency (LEP). This project addresses a critical component of this problem: The need to improve access to high quality, mental health services for diverse populations by improving the flow of clinical work across care settings (primary care and specialty care) through the use of innovative online asynchronous methods of language interpretation and clinical communication. The investigators are conducting a two phase study. The first phase is completed and involved developing and testing the interpreting tool. The second phase of the research is a clinical trial to compare two methods of cross-language psychiatric assessment.
Detailed Description:
The investigators propose to develop and test a novel automated asynchronous interpretation tool. The proposed project builds on previous research, piloting the automated asynchronous interpretation tool. This 5-year project will be conducted in two phases. In Phase 1 the investigators iteratively evaluate and refine the automated asynchronous interpretation tool already developed in prior studies. In Phase 2, the investigators evaluate this tool using a two-group randomized cross-over trial. Investigators compare:
* Method A (current gold standard of in-person real-time interpreting practice). A Spanish-speaking patient is diagnostically assessed in-person by an English-speaking psychiatrist through a Spanish-speaking interpreter.
* Method B (comparative practice - ATP). A Spanish-speaking patient is interviewed in Spanish by a trained mental health interviewer. The interview is recorded in real time, translated into English using the automatic interpretation tool and adding sub-titles to the video file, and sent to an English-speaking psychiatrist to asynchronously - that is, at a later time - review the video and make a diagnosis.
All patients will undergo evaluation by both methods. Half of the patients will be randomized to be assessed by Method A first, followed by Method B and half to be assessed by Method B first, followed by Method A. The specific aims of the study are :
* Aim 1: To iteratively evaluate and refine the automated asynchronous interpretation tool already developed in prior studies.
* Aim 2: To compare patient satisfaction of Method A vs. Method B.
* Aim 3: To compare the diagnostic accuracy and psychiatrist inter-rater reliability of Method A vs. Method B and demonstrate psychiatrist inter-rater reliability for Method B.
* Aim 4: To compare the interview and language interpretation quality and accuracy of Method A vs. Method B.
* Method A (current gold standard of in-person real-time interpreting practice). A Spanish-speaking patient is diagnostically assessed in-person by an English-speaking psychiatrist through a Spanish-speaking interpreter.
* Method B (comparative practice - ATP). A Spanish-speaking patient is interviewed in Spanish by a trained mental health interviewer. The interview is recorded in real time, translated into English using the automatic interpretation tool and adding sub-titles to the video file, and sent to an English-speaking psychiatrist to asynchronously - that is, at a later time - review the video and make a diagnosis.
All patients will undergo evaluation by both methods. Half of the patients will be randomized to be assessed by Method A first, followed by Method B and half to be assessed by Method B first, followed by Method A. The specific aims of the study are :
* Aim 1: To iteratively evaluate and refine the automated asynchronous interpretation tool already developed in prior studies.
* Aim 2: To compare patient satisfaction of Method A vs. Method B.
* Aim 3: To compare the diagnostic accuracy and psychiatrist inter-rater reliability of Method A vs. Method B and demonstrate psychiatrist inter-rater reliability for Method B.
* Aim 4: To compare the interview and language interpretation quality and accuracy of Method A vs. Method B.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?:
Secondary ID Infos
| Secondary ID | Type | Domain | Link | View |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R01HS024949 | AHRQ | None | https://reporter.nih.gov/quic… | View |