Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26766557›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Nurse Practitioners' Use of Communication Techniques: Results of a Maryland Oral Health Literacy Survey.

Laura W Koo, Alice M Horowitz, Sarah D Radice, Min Q Wang, Dushanka V Kleinman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Influence of Robot-Assisted Learning System on Health Literacy and Learning Perception.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Nurses' Perspectives on Health Education and Health Literacy of Older Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Use of Recommended Communication Techniques by Diabetes Educators.Health literacy research and practice · 2017
    Article
  7. The AMA Communication Techniques Survey: A Psychometric Analysis.Health literacy research and practice · 2017
    Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Laura W KooDepartment of Organizational Systems and Adult Health, School of Nursing, University of Maryland Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, United States of America.
Alice M HorowitzDepartment of Behavioral and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Maryland College Park, College Park, MD, United States of America.
Sarah D RadiceOffice of the Dean, School of Public Health, University of Maryland College Park, College Park, MD, United States of America.
Min Q WangDepartment of Behavioral and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Maryland College Park, College Park, MD, United States of America.
Dushanka V KleinmanDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Maryland College Park, College Park, MD, United States of America.
University of Maryland, College Park · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe examined nurse practitioners' use and opinions of recommended communication techniques for the promotion of oral health as part of a Maryland state-wide oral health literacy assessment. Use of recommended health-literate and patient-centered communication techniques have demonstrated improved health outcomes.

methodsA 27-item self-report survey, containing 17 communication technique items, across 5 domains, was mailed to 1,410 licensed nurse practitioners (NPs) in Maryland in 2010. Use of communication techniques and opinions about their effectiveness were analyzed using descriptive statistics. General linear models explored provider and practice characteristics to predict differences in the total number and the mean number of communication techniques routinely used in a week.

resultsMore than 80% of NPs (N = 194) routinely used 3 of the 7 basic communication techniques: simple language, limiting teaching to 2-3 concepts, and speaking slowly. More than 75% of respondents believed that 6 of the 7 basic communication techniques are effective. Sociodemographic provider characteristics and practice characteristics were not significant predictors of the mean number or the total number of communication techniques routinely used by NPs in a week. Potential predictors for using more of the 7 basic communication techniques, demonstrating significance in one general linear model each, were: assessing the office for user-friendliness and ever taking a communication course in addition to nursing school.

conclusionsNPs in Maryland self-reported routinely using some recommended health-literate communication techniques, with belief in their effectiveness. Our findings suggest that NPs who had assessed the office for patient-friendliness or who had taken a communication course beyond their initial education may be predictors for using more of the 7 basic communication techniques. These self-reported findings should be validated with observational studies. Graduate and continuing education for NPs should increase emphasis on health-literate and patient-centered communication techniques to increase patient understanding of dental caries prevention. Non-dental healthcare providers, such as NPs, are uniquely positioned to contribute to preventing early childhood dental caries through health-literate and patient-centered communication.

Indexed as

CommunicationOral HealthAdultFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMarylandMiddle AgedNurse Practitioners

Identifiers

PMID26766557
PMCPMC4713077
OpenAlexW2235037807

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.