ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2021
A health literacy analysis of the consumer-oriented COVID-19 information produced by ten state health departments.
Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Randomized experimental test of a reduced-exposure message for an e-cigarette: comprehension and related misperceptions.Health education research · 2025Trial
- Optimization of University Counseling Consent Forms With Large Language Models: Multidimensional Comparative Evaluation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Privacy policies for FDA-authorized or FDA-recognized digital therapeutics impose high digital health literacy demands: a cross-sectional analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Health Literacy and Usability of Public Health Websites for COVID-19 Vaccine Search.Health literacy research and practice · 2026Article
- Performance of large language models in reporting oral health concerns and side effects in head and neck cancer: a comparative study.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Assessing the Understandability and Actionability of Education Materials for Agricultural Workers' Health.Journal of agromedicine · 2025Article
- Video Abstracts in Research.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Evaluating understandability and actionability of online education materials for home-care patients with COVID-19 in Japan.BMC research notes · 2023Article
- Disparities in the level of COVID-19 health literacy and the associated factors among employees in long-term care facilities in Taiwan.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Article
- COVID-19 Vaccine Videos: Health Literacy Considerations.Health literacy research and practice · 2023Article
- COVID-19 information uptake amongst a rheumatology interested population.Clinical rheumatology · 2023Article
- Health literacy characteristics of over-the-counter rapid antigen COVID-19 test materials.Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP · 2022Article
- Readability of COVID-19 health science information on the official websites of 27 Provincial Health Commissions in China.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic highlights the public's need for quality health information that is understandable. This study aimed to identify (1) the extent to which COVID-19 messaging by state public health departments is understandable, actionable, and clear; (2) whether materials produced by public health departments are easily readable; (3) relationships between material type and understandability, actionability, clarity, and reading grade level; and (4) potential strategies to improve public health messaging around COVID-19.
methodsBased on US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics from June 30, 2020, we identified the ten states with the most COVID-19 cases and selected forty-two materials (i.e., webpages, infographics, and videos) related to COVID-19 prevention according to predefined eligibility criteria. We applied three validated health literacy tools (i.e., Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool, CDC Clear Communication Index, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level) to assess material understandability, actionability, clarity, and readability. We also analyzed correlations between scores on the three health literacy tools and material types.
resultsOverall, COVID-19 materials had high understandability and actionability but could be improved in terms of clarity and readability. Material type was significantly correlated with understandability, actionability, and clarity. Infographics and videos received higher scores on all tools.
conclusionsBased on our findings, we recommend public health entities apply a combination of these tools when developing health information materials to improve their understandability, actionability, and clarity. We also recommend using infographics and videos when possible, taking a human-centered approach to information design, and providing multiple modes and platforms for information delivery.
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.