ReviewPatient preference and adherence2015
What are judgment skills in health literacy? A psycho-cognitive perspective of judgment and decision-making research.
Review in Patient preference and adherence, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient involvement in the biopsychosocial integrated primary care model: A qualitative study in three health districts of South Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Preferences for Tailored Support - Patients' and Health Care Professionals' Experiences Regarding Symptoms and Self-Management Strategies During the First Year After Curatively Intended Prostate Cancer Treatment.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- The interplay between risk and protective factors during the initial height of the COVID-19 crisis in Italy: The role of risk aversion and intolerance of ambiguity on distress.Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Value Attribution in the Decision to Use of Whole Body MRI for Early Cancer Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A "Third Wheel" Effect in Health Decision Making Involving Artificial Entities: A Psychological Perspective.Frontiers in public health · 2020Article
- The Role of Autobiographical Story-Telling During Rehabilitation Among Hip-Fracture Geriatric Patients.Europe's journal of psychology · 2018Article
- Article
- Article
- What factors are associated with perceived disease onset in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis?Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
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
objectiveThe aim of this review is to summarize current research relating to psychological processes involved in judgment and decision-making (JDM) and identify which processes can be incorporated and used in the construct of health literacy (HL) in order to enrich its conceptualization and to provide more information about people's preferences.
methodsThe literature review was aimed at identifying comprehensive research in the field; therefore appropriate databases were searched for English language articles dated from 1998 to 2015.
resultsSeveral psychological processes have been found to be constituents of JDM and potentially incorporated in the definition of HL: cognition, self-regulation, emotion, reasoning-thinking, and social perception.
conclusionHL research can benefit from this JDM literature overview, first, by elaborating on the idea that judgment is multidimensional and constituted by several specific processes, and second, by using the results to implement the definition of "judgment skills". Moreover, this review can favor the development of new instruments that can measure HL. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Future researchers in HL should work together with researchers in psychological sciences not only to investigate the processes behind JDM in-depth but also to create effective opportunities to improve HL in all patients, to promote good decisions, and orient patients' preferences in all health contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.