Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28093428›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Exploring health literacy competencies towards patient education programme for Chinese-speaking healthcare professionals: a Delphi study.

Li-Chun Chang, Yu-Chi Chen, Fei Ling Wu, Li-Ling Liao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. How Do Healthcare Professionals Develop the Communication Process to Promote Patients' Health Literacy?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Professional Responsiveness to Health Literacy: A Scoping Review.Health literacy research and practice · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

4 authors.

Li-Chun ChangSchool of Nursing, Chang Gung University of Science and Technology, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan.
Yu-Chi ChenInstitute of Clinical Nursing, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Fei Ling WuSchool of Nursing, Chang Gung University of Science and Technology, Tao-Yuan, Taiwan.
Li-Ling LiaoDepartment of Health Management, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo achieve consensus on a set of competencies in health literacy practice based on a literature review and expert consultation.

settingHospitals and community health centres in Taiwan.

methodA 2-stage modified Delphi study involving a literature review was conducted, followed by qualitative interviews and 3 rounds of email-based data collection over a 3-month period in 2011.

participants15 Chinese healthcare practitioners with more than 6 months' experience in patient education were interviewed to collect data on health literacy practice. 24 experts (12 academic scholars in health literacy and 12 professionals with training related to health literacy practice) were invited to participate in the Delphi process.

resultsQualitative data from the interviews were analysed and summarised to form 99 competency items for health literacy practice, which were categorised into 5 domains of health literacy practice including those pertaining to knowledge and skills. Consensus was reached on 92 of 99 competencies, using a modified Delphi technique.

conclusionsThe 92 competencies in health literacy practice embraced core components of patient education in the Chinese healthcare profession.

Indexed as

Delphi TechniqueClinical CompetenceHealth LiteracyHealth PersonnelHumansInterviews as TopicPatient Education as TopicTaiwancompetenciesDelphi methodhealth literacyhealth profession

Identifiers

PMID28093428
PMCPMC5253604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.