Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34639262›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Work-Related Health Literacy: A Scoping Review to Clarify the Concept.

Anna T Ehmann, Eylem Ög, Monika A Rieger, Achim Siegel

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anna T EhmannInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital Tübingen, Wilhelmstr. 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5898-6066
Eylem ÖgInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital Tübingen, Wilhelmstr. 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany.
Monika A RiegerInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital Tübingen, Wilhelmstr. 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7855-3663
Achim SiegelInstitute of Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital Tübingen, Wilhelmstr. 27, 72074 Tübingen, Germany.
University Children's Hospital Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The overall aim of this scoping review is to outline the current state of research on health literacy (HL) in the workplace: the primary objective is to clarify the concept of individual work-related HL; the secondary aims are to report on interventions that promote individual work-related HL and to present respective measurement instruments validated to date. A high level of work-related HL could support work ability and in the longer run employability. These topics are becoming increasingly important in current circumstances and in view of ongoing developments (e.g., digitalization and "new" work). A basic understanding and measurement of HL as an individual competence in the context of working life is necessary to develop future interventions to promote HL among people of working age. According to the participants, concept, and context (PCC) framework, we included articles on health literacy (concept) in the target group of people of working age in the workplace (population and context). Key information sources were the databases PubMed, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and PSYNDEX. A total of 30 articles were included. There are several terms for "health literacy in the workplace" (including individual work-related or occupational HL). The conceptualizations of the individual employee's competence covered all aspects of HL ("access", "understand", "appraise", and "apply" health information). The conceptualizations differed, among others, in the covered time horizon (referring either only to employees' current work situation or additionally to their employability in the lifespan) or whether they referred also to the viability of the respective company. Published interventions attempting to promote individual work-related HL seem mostly to be targeted at the promotion of mental HL. A variety of outcomes have been measured in intervention studies, while specific measurement instruments for individual work-related HL seem to be scarce. We recommend the development of country-specific instruments for the assessment of individual work-related health literacy and to measure mental and physical work-related health literacy.

Indexed as

Health LiteracyOccupational HealthHumansMental HealthPhysical ExaminationWorkplaceemployabilityemployeeshealth literacywork abilityworkplace setting

Identifiers

PMID34639262
PMCPMC8507793
OpenAlexW3195360963

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.