Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28728547›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2017

Community-based initiatives improving critical health literacy: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative evidence.

Liesbeth de Wit, Christine Fenenga, Cinzia Giammarchi, Lucia di Furia, Inge Hutter, Andrea de Winter, Louise Meijering

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 54 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Harnessing the power of empathy, visual art and patient narratives to improve health literacy: An exploratory study.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Liesbeth de WitUniversity of Groningen, Population Research Centre / Urban and Regional Studies Institute, Landleven 1, P.O. Box 800, 9700, AV, Groningen, The Netherlands. l.s.de.wit@rug.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-1649-0062
Christine FenengaUniversity of Groningen, Population Research Centre / Urban and Regional Studies Institute, Landleven 1, P.O. Box 800, 9700, AV, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Cinzia GiammarchiAgenzia Regionale Sanitaria (The Regional Agency for Health), Marche Region, Via Gentile da Fabriano n.3 nel palazzo Rossini, 60125, Ancona, Italy.
Lucia di FuriaAgenzia Regionale Sanitaria (The Regional Agency for Health), Marche Region, Via Gentile da Fabriano n.3 nel palazzo Rossini, 60125, Ancona, Italy.
Inge HutterInternational Institute of Social Studies, The Hague, of Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Kortenaerkade 12, 2518, AX, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Andrea de WinterDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Postbus 196, 9700 AD, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Louise MeijeringUniversity of Groningen, Population Research Centre / Urban and Regional Studies Institute, Landleven 1, P.O. Box 800, 9700, AV, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCritical health literacy enables older adults to make informed health decisions and take actions for the health and wellbeing of themselves and their community, within their own social and cultural context. A community-based approach has the potential to improve the critical health literacy of older adults and their communities. However, it is not clear how such initiatives consider critical health literacy. Therefore, this study explored how community-based initiatives address the critical health literacy of older adults and their communities.

methodsA systematic literature search was conducted. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, as well as the quality of the methodological and community-based elements of the studies. In addition, a meta-synthesis was carried out, consisting of a qualitative text analysis of the results sections of the 23 included studies.

resultsWe identified two main themes, which are practices that contribute to the critical health literacy of older adults as well as their communities: 1) collaborative learning, and 2) social support. In these practices we identified reciprocity as a key characteristic of both co-learning and social support.

conclusionsThis study provides the first overview of community-based initiatives that implicitly address the critical health literacy of older adults and their community. Our results demonstrate that in the context of one's own life collaborative learning and social support could contribute to people's understanding and ability to judge, sift and use health information. We therefore suggest to add these two practices to the definition of critical health literacy.

Indexed as

Social SupportAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCommunity NetworksFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchCommunitiesCommunity-based initiativesCritical health literacyMeta-synthesisOlder adultsQualitative data analysisSocial and cultural contextSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID28728547
PMCPMC5520348

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.