Trial reportBMC public health2019
'Teach-back' is a simple communication tool that improves disease knowledge in people with chronic hepatitis B - a pilot randomized controlled study.
Trial report in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Teach-Back in Clinical Communication: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of the teach-back method among cancer patients: a systematic review of the literature.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Pooled it
- Influence of teach-back strategy on hemodialysis related knowledge level, self-efficacy and self-management in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Investigating the effect of multimedia education in combination with teach-back method on quality of life and cardiac anxiety in patients with heart failure: a randomized clinical trial.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2021Trial
- Assessing the feasibility, acceptability and impacts of an education program on hepatitis B testing uptake among ethnic Chinese in Australia: results of a randomised controlled pilot study.BMC public health · 2021Trial
- Longitudinal Adherence Trajectories of First-Line Nucleotide Analogues among US Older Adults with Chronic Hepatitis B.Drugs & aging · 2026Article
- Consumer Co-Design of an Online Resource to Build Communication Skills of Health Consumers: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Knowledge needs in patients with Liver Disease: a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2023Article
- "The most culturally safe training I've ever had": the co-design of a culturally safe Managing hepatitis B training course with and for the Aboriginal health workforce of the Northern Territory of Australia.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Digital Health Literacy in Patients With Heart Failure in Times of Pandemic.Computers, informatics, nursing : CIN · 2022Article
- Victorian healthcare experience survey 2016-2018; evaluation of interventions to improve the patient experience.BMC health services research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe low diagnosis rate and poor access to clinical care among people with CHB is a major barrier to reducing HBV-related morbidity and mortality in Australia. One explanation for this is a lack of disease-specific knowledge among people living with CHB. Health literacy has been shown to be important for maximising engagement with medical care and adherence to recommended management. The 'teach-back' communication strategy has been shown to improve patient understanding in other clinical areas. This study aims to assess disease-specific knowledge; and evaluate the efficacy of the teach-back strategy for improving HBV knowledge, compared to a standard medical consultation.
methodA randomized pilot study was conducted between February and June 2017. Participants were recruited from the liver clinic at an inner-city tertiary hospital. English-speaking patients aged ≥18 years and diagnosed with CHB were eligible for the study. Participants were randomised to a control group (medical specialist appointment) and intervention group (teach-back). Knowledge was assessed at baseline, immediately post-intervention and at one month using a validated questionnaire. Participants in the intervention group received a one-on-one teach-back session about CHB. The main outcome measure was a combined knowledge score of the domains assessed - transmission, natural history, epidemiology and prevention and clinical management.
resultsSeventy participants were recruited (control n = 32, teach-back n = 38). Mean baseline knowledge score was 19.1 out of 23 with 55 (79%) participants scoring ≥17.3 (defined as high knowledge) (7). Sub-analysis of CHB knowledge domains identified focal deficits concerning transmission and whether HBV is curable. Knowledge scores were found to be positively associated with English proficiency and antiviral treatment experience (p < 0.05). Teach-back was associated with a significant increase in CHB knowledge at early recall (22.5 vs 18.7, p < 0.001) and at 1-month follow-up (21.9 vs 18.7, p < 0.001); there was no improvement in CHB knowledge associated with standard clinical consultant (early recall: 19.6 vs 19.4, p = 0.49, one-month follow-up: 19.5 vs 19.4, p = 0.94).
conclusionIn a tertiary hospital liver clinic population, baseline knowledge about CHB was good, but there were focal deficits concerning transmission and potential for cure. Teach-back was associated with improvement in CHB knowledge and it is a simple communication tool suitable for incorporation into a standard medical consultation.
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.