Article Text

Download PDFPDF

2028 Is language a barrier to inclusion in research in paediatric emergency medicine? A rapid review of PEM research in the UK
  1. Hannah Walsh1,
  2. Silothabo Dliso2,
  3. Ayman Ahmed3,
  4. Maisy Moxon4,
  5. Louise Roper5,
  6. Shrouk Messahel1
  1. 1Alder Hey Children’s NHS Foundation Trust
  2. 2Alder Hey Children’s Hospital
  3. 3Sixth Form student, Birkenhead School, Wirral, UK
  4. 4Sixth Form student, Formby School, Liverpool, UK
  5. 5Resilience Hub, Lancashire and South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust


Aims and Objectives English language skill is an indicator of health status in the UK. Evidence suggests that people requiring translation services are often excluded from research, therefore contributing to already existing health inequalities within the country.

Data on the exclusion of people requiring translation services in paediatric emergency medicine (PEM) research is scarce. This review aims to gain insight on whether people requiring translation services are being excluded from PEM research, and to explore the barriers to inclusion faced by researchers.

Method and Design Structured review of PEM studies published in three major journals between 2016-2021. Journals reviewed were Archives of Disease in Childhood, BMJ Emergency Medicine, and the Lancet Adolescent and Child Health; as well as published studies by the Paediatric Emergency Research in the UK and Ireland (PERUKI) Network. Studies were included if they were carried out in a PEM setting and required consent from participants. An electronic survey was then sent to corresponding authors of the included studies.

Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) were used to provide information about variables. Free text survey responses were reviewed for common themes.

Results and Conclusion 1687 articles were found initially; 18 met the inclusion criteria. Eight studies (44.4%) reported exclusion of people requiring translation services. Nine studies (50%) made no mention of whether people requiring translation services were included or excluded in the study. 11 out of 18 survey responses were received. The key themes to exclusionary practice identified were oversight, access to adequate translation services (including cost implications), and lack of guidance.

English language proficiency was reported to be a reason for exclusion from participation in PEM research. Various challenges to inclusive practice regarding language in PEM research were identified. These challenges require further exploration to inform the development of guidance and strategies; ultimately leading to better inclusion of people requiring translation services in PEM research.


  1. Jill Roberts Public Health England. Local action on health inequalities. Improving health literacy to reduce health inequalities. Practice resource summary: September 2015 [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2022 Nov 17]. Available from:

  2. Frayne SM, Burns RB, Hardt EJ, Rosen AK, Moskowitz MA. The exclusion of non-english-speaking persons from research. J Gen Intern Med. 1996 Jan;11(1):39–43.

  3. Brodeur M, Herrick J, Guardioloa J, Richman P. Exclusion of non-english speakers in published emergency medicine research - a comparison of 2004 and 2014. Acta Inform Medica. 2017;25(2):112.

  4. Murray S, Buller AM. Exclusion on grounds of language ability – a reporting gap in health services research? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007 Oct 1;12(4):205–8.

  5. Egleston BL, Pedraza O, Wong YN, Dunbrack RL, Griffin CL, Ross EA, et al. Characteristics of clinical trials that require participants to be fluent in English. Clin Trials. 2015 Dec;12(6):618–26.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.