ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2021
Development and validation of education materials to reduce childhood blindness due to retinopathy of prematurity.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTimely and appropriate follow-up appointments for infants at risk for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) are very important to prevent blindness. Caregivers are important members of the ROP team, and their involvement is essential in ensuring optimal visual outcomes. This paper aimed to develop health information materials on ROP by a systematic process for better comprehensibility by the target audience of low literacy. MATERIALS AND
methodsIt was a methodological study conducted at the neonatal intensive care unit of a tertiary care hospital, North India. The development and validation of educational materials was conducted in six steps. The study focused on both the knowledge of the target audience and on the validation of the educational materials by experts and caregivers of ROP eligible infants.
resultsMost of the items (content, language, layout, motivation, and cultural appropriateness) were in either a suitable or adequate category. Only one item illustration was in the nonsuitable category. The mean final score of the leaflet after revision by experts was 9 (maximum score = 10). Regarding readability, The Flesch Reading Ease Score, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, and gunning fog index were found to be 72.5, 7.4, and 6.2, respectively. The leaflet was found to be suitable for the seventh grader. The mean knowledge score of the parents was 4 (maximum score-5).
conclusionThe study showed satisfactory acceptance of the developed ROP information materials by caregivers and experts. A similar approach could be adopted for the development of other health information materials.
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.