Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25586711›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2015

The effectiveness of health animations in audiences with different health literacy levels: an experimental study.

Corine S Meppelink, Julia C M van Weert, Carola J Haven, Edith G Smit

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 106 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
106citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
26.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

106 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 266 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Health Literacy Interventions in Cancer: a Systematic Review.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. "Build better bones": development, launch, and future directions of a multilingual, user-centered website for osteoporosis management.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Article

46 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Corine S MeppelinkAmsterdam School of Communication Research/ASCoR, Department of Communication Science, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands. c.s.meppelink@uva.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2375-9565
University of Amsterdam · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProcessing Web-based health information can be difficult, especially for people with low health literacy. Presenting health information in an audiovisual format, such as animation, is expected to improve understanding among low health literate audiences.

objectiveThe aim of this paper is to investigate what features of spoken health animations improve information recall and attitudes and whether there are differences between health literacy groups.

methodsWe conducted an online experiment among 231 participants aged 55 years or older with either low or high health literacy. A 2 (spoken vs written text) x 2 (illustration vs animation) design was used. Participants were randomly exposed to one of the four experimental messages, all providing the same information on colorectal cancer screening.

resultsThe results showed that, among people with low health literacy, spoken messages about colorectal cancer screening improved recall (P=.03) and attitudes (P=.02) compared to written messages. Animations alone did not improve recall, but when combined with spoken text, they significantly improved recall in this group (P=.02). When exposed to spoken animations, people with low health literacy recalled the same amount of information as their high health literate counterparts (P=.12), whereas in all other conditions people with high health literacy recalled more information compared to low health literate individuals. For people with low health literacy, positive attitudes mediated the relationship between spoken text and the intention to have a colorectal cancer screening (b=.12; 95% CI 0.02-0.25).

conclusionsWe conclude that spoken animation is the best way to communicate complex health information to people with low health literacy. This format can even bridge the information processing gap between audiences with low and high health literacy as the recall differences between the two groups are eliminated. As animations do not negatively influence high health literate audiences, it is concluded that information adapted to audiences with low health literacy suits people with high health literacy as well.

Indexed as

Audiovisual AidsComputer GraphicsEarly Detection of CancerHealth LiteracyMedical IllustrationAgedColorectal NeoplasmsComprehensionFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMaleMental RecallMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health Careanimationattitudesaudiovisual mediacancer screeningcolorectal cancerhealth literacymedical illustrationmemorypreventionreading

Identifiers

PMID25586711
PMCPMC4319081
OpenAlexW2028608089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.