ArticleRheumatology international2015
Cross-sectional correlation of single-item health literacy screening questions with established measures of health literacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social determinants of health literacy among parents and caregivers in the US-Affiliated Pacific.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Comparison of Newest Vital Sign and Brief Health Literacy Screen scores in a large, urban Hispanic cohort.Patient education and counseling · 2023Article
- Osteoarthritis management: Does the pharmacist play a role in bridging the gap between what patients actually know and what they ought to know? Insights from a national online survey.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Review
- Validation of a Single Question Health Literacy Screening Tool for Older Adults.Gerontology & geriatric medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research suggests that health literacy (HL) is associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients' functional status. Single-item health literacy screening (SILS) questionnaires may establish patients' HL; however, the wording of SILS may be misinterpreted by RA patients as a query regarding physical limitations. Despite this threat to validity, multiple publications have employed the SILSs as a measure of health literacy. We assessed the construct validity of two SILS's versions by correlating scores with standardized HL measures. English-speaking adult RA patients at a hospital serving low-income patients were enrolled in a cross-sectional study. Subjects completed two SILS versions, as well as two longer HL measurement tools [short test of functional health literacy in adults (s-TOFHLA) and the rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine (REALM)]. Spearman correlation was used to compare these tools. The study enrolled 110 subjects. There was a good correlation between the two SILS versions (r = 0.705). The correlation of SILS2 and REALM or s-TOFHLA was less robust. The distribution of scores within each SILS2 category demonstrated substantial variation. The SILS2 has construct validity in the assessment of HL in patients with RA, though its correlation with traditional methods of assessing HL is weak.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25744280What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.