Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24207115›Full record

SynthesisPatient education and counseling2014

Health literacy and cancer screening: a systematic review.

Benjamin R Oldach, Mira L Katz

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Patient education and counseling, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03843957 (Effectiveness and Implementation of mPATH-CRC), which is not on this map. Cited by 130 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
130citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03843957 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness and Implementation of mPATH-CRC: a Mobile Health System for Colorectal Cancer Screening

TypeinterventionalSponsorWake Forest University Health SciencesRan2019 to 2023Enrolled77,145ConditionsColorectal Cancer, Cancer, Rectum Cancer, Colon CancerArmsmPATH-CRC, mPATH-Checkin, "high touch" Implementation strategy, "low touch" Implementation Strategy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

130 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Personalizing cancer risk: a systematic review of risk communication strategies.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Barriers and Facilitators to Participation in Health Screening: an Umbrella Review Across Conditions.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Empirically Tested Health Literacy Frameworks.Health literacy research and practice · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. Health Literacy in Surgery.Health literacy research and practice · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Increasing Women's Knowledge about HPV Using BERT Text Summarization: An Online Randomized Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

70 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Benjamin R OldachComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA.
Mira L KatzComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA; Division of Health Behavior and Health Promotion, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA. Electronic address: mira.katz@osumc.edu.

Funding

Patient Activation To Increase Colon Cancer ScreeningK07CA107079 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI KATZ, MIRA L · 2005 to 2009
$783k
NCI NIH HHS K07 CA107079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate published evidence about health literacy and cancer screening.

methodsSeven databases were searched for English language articles measuring health literacy and cancer screening published in 1990-2011. Articles meeting inclusion criteria were independently reviewed by two investigators using a standardized data abstraction form. Abstracts (n=932) were reviewed and full text retrieved for 83 articles. Ten articles with 14 comparisons of health literacy and cancer screening according to recommended medical guidelines were included in the analysis.

resultsMost articles measured health literacy using the S-TOFHLA instrument and documented cancer screening by self-report. There is a trend for an association of inadequate health literacy and lower cancer screening rates, however, the evidence is mixed and limited by study design and measurement issues.

conclusionA patient's health literacy may be a contributing factor to being within recommended cancer screening guidelines. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Future research should: be conducted using validated health literacy instruments; describe the population included in the study; document cancer screening test completion according to recommended guidelines; verify the completion of cancer screening tests by medical record review; adjust for confounding factors; and report effect size of the association of health literacy and cancer screening.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth LiteracyMass ScreeningEarly Detection of CancerHumansNeoplasmsCancerCancer screeningHealth literacy

Identifiers

PMID24207115
PMCPMC3946869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.