Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31064336›Full record

Trial reportBMC geriatrics2019

An education intervention to improve decision making and health literacy among older Australians: a randomised controlled trial.

Caroline A Smith, Esther Chang, Gisselle Gallego, Afshan Khan, Mike Armour, Lynda G Balneaves

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC geriatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Caroline A SmithNICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2571, Australia. caroline.smith@westernsydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-7828-0597
Esther ChangSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia.
Gisselle GallegoSchool of Medicine, The University of Notre Dame, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Afshan KhanNICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2571, Australia.
Mike ArmourNICM Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2571, Australia.
Lynda G BalneavesCollege of Nursing, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Manitoba, Canada.
Western Sydney University · AUThe University of Notre Dame Australia · AUUniversity of Manitoba · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNational policies seek to involve older Australian's in decisions regarding their care; however, research has found varying levels of decision self-efficacy and health literacy skills. An increasing number of older Australians use complementary medicine (CM). We examined the effectiveness of a CM educational intervention delivered using a web or DVD plus booklet format to increase older adults' decision self-efficacy and health literacy.

methodsA randomised controlled trial was conducted. We recruited individuals aged over 65 years living in retirement villages or participating in community groups, in Sydney Australia. Participants were randomly allocated to receive a CM education intervention delivered using a website or DVD plus booklet versus booklet only. The primary outcome was decision self-efficacy. A secondary outcome included the Preparation for Decision-Making scale and health literacy. Outcomes were collected at 3 weeks, and 2 months from baseline, and analysed using an adjusted ANOVA, or repeated measures ANOVA.

resultWe randomised 153 participants. Follow up at 3 weeks and 2 months was completed by 131 participants. There was a 14% (n = 22) attrition rate. At the end of the intervention, we found no significant differences between groups for decision self-efficacy (mean difference (MD) 3.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.0 to 9.6 p = 0.20), there were no differences between groups on nine health literacy domains, and the Preparation for Decision-Making scale. Over 80% of participants in both groups rated the content as excellent or good.

conclusionDecision self-efficacy improved for participants, but did not differ between groups. Decision self-efficacy and health literacy outcomes were not influenced by the delivery of education using a website, DVD or booklet. Participants found the resources useful, and rated the content as good or excellent. CM Web or DVD and booklet resources have the potential for wider application.

trial registrationThe trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN ( ACTRN12616000135415 ). The trial was registered on 5 February 2016.

Indexed as

Decision MakingSelf EfficacyAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansInternetMalePamphletsPatient Education as TopicComplementary medicineDecision makingHealth literacyRandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID31064336
PMCPMC6505289
OpenAlexW2946422410

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.