Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32966630›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2021

Employing computational linguistics techniques to identify limited patient health literacy: Findings from the ECLIPPSE study.

Dean Schillinger, Renu Balyan, Scott A Crossley, Danielle S McNamara, Jennifer Y Liu, Andrew J Karter

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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 4 institutions in 1 country.

Dean SchillingerUCSF Division of General Internal Medicine, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, San Francisco, California, USA.
Renu BalyanIra A. Fulton School of Engineering, Arizona State University, Mesa, Arizona, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1393-2416
Scott A CrossleyDepartment of Applied Linguistics/ESL, College of Arts and Sciences, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Danielle S McNamaraDepartment of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA.
Jennifer Y LiuDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California, USA.
Andrew J KarterUCSF Division of General Internal Medicine, Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5527-316X
Arizona State University · USSan Francisco General Hospital · USGeorgia State University · USKaiser Permanente · US

Funding

Research BaseP30DK063720 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI VAISSE, CHRISTIAN · 2003 to 2019
$21.8M
UCSF Nutrition Obesity Research CenterP30DK098722 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI CHRISTIAN VAISSE · 2015 to 2026
$14.6M
Translational Research Core - Health Engagement & Action Translational (HEAT)P30DK092924 · NIDDK · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI Alyce Sophia Adams, HILARY Kessler SELIGMAN · 2011 to 2026
$9.2M
Ethnic Disparities in Diabetes ComplicationsR01DK065664 · NIDDK · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI KARTER, ANDREW JOHN · 2004 to 2008
$3.3M
The Next Frontier in Diabetes Communication: Promoting Health Literacy in the Era of Secure MessagingR01LM012355 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI KARTER, ANDREW JOHN, SCHILLINGER, DEAN · 2015 to 2018
$2.8M
Educational Disparities in Diabetes ComplicationsR01HD046113 · NICHD · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI KARTER, ANDREW JOHN · 2003 to 2006
$1.6M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD046113NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK063720NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092924NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK098722NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK065664NLM NIH HHS R01 LM012355
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo develop novel, scalable, and valid literacy profiles for identifying limited health literacy patients by harnessing natural language processing. DATA SOURCE: With respect to the linguistic content, we analyzed 283 216 secure messages sent by 6941 diabetes patients to physicians within an integrated system's electronic portal. Sociodemographic, clinical, and utilization data were obtained via questionnaire and electronic health records. STUDY

designRetrospective study used natural language processing and machine learning to generate five unique "Literacy Profiles" by employing various sets of linguistic indices: Flesch-Kincaid (LP_FK); basic indices of writing complexity, including lexical diversity (LP_LD) and writing quality (LP_WQ); and advanced indices related to syntactic complexity, lexical sophistication, and diversity, modeled from self-reported (LP_SR), and expert-rated (LP_Exp) health literacy. We first determined the performance of each literacy profile relative to self-reported and expert-rated health literacy to discriminate between high and low health literacy and then assessed Literacy Profiles' relationships with known correlates of health literacy, such as patient sociodemographics and a range of health-related outcomes, including ratings of physician communication, medication adherence, diabetes control, comorbidities, and utilization. PRINCIPAL

findingsLP_SR and LP_Exp performed best in discriminating between high and low self-reported (C-statistics: 0.86 and 0.58, respectively) and expert-rated health literacy (C-statistics: 0.71 and 0.87, respectively) and were significantly associated with educational attainment, race/ethnicity, Consumer Assessment of Provider and Systems (CAHPS) scores, adherence, glycemia, comorbidities, and emergency department visits.

conclusionsSince health literacy is a potentially remediable explanatory factor in health care disparities, the development of automated health literacy indicators represents a significant accomplishment with broad clinical and population health applications. Health systems could apply literacy profiles to efficiently determine whether quality of care and outcomes vary by patient health literacy; identify at-risk populations for targeting tailored health communications and self-management support interventions; and inform clinicians to promote improvements in individual-level care.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusElectronic Health RecordsHealth LiteracyHumansNatural Language ProcessingPatient Education as TopicPhysician-Patient RelationsProcess Assessment, Health CareRetrospective Studiescommunicationdiabeteshealth literacymachine learningmanaged carenatural language processingsecure messaging

Identifiers

PMID32966630
PMCPMC7839650
OpenAlexW3087976151

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.