Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35839313›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical radiation sciences2022

What is the effect of a low literacy talking book on patient knowledge, anxiety and communication before radiation therapy starts? A pilot study.

Sian K Smith-Lickess, Natalie Stefanic, Joanne Shaw, Heather Shepherd, Diana Naehrig, Robin M Turner, Maria Cabrera-Aguas, Bettina Meiser, Georgia Kb Halkett, Michael Jackson and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical radiation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Continuing Professional Development - Radiation Therapy.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2024
    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

14 authors.

Sian K Smith-LickessPsychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9541-2221
Natalie StefanicPsychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Joanne ShawPsycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Heather ShepherdPsycho-Oncology Co-operative Research Group (PoCoG), School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Diana NaehrigSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Robin M TurnerDunedin School of Medicine, Otago University, Wellington, New Zealand.
Maria Cabrera-AguasPsychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Bettina MeiserPsychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Georgia Kb HalkettFaculty of Health Sciences, Curtin School of Nursing, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4065-4044
Michael JacksonUNSW Sydney, Prince of Wales Clinical School, Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
George SaadeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nelune Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Joseph BucciSt George Hospital Cancer Care, Radiation Oncology Unit, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Christopher MilrossSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Haryana M DhillonSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

Translational Cancer Research Networks Cancer Challenge of the Year (2014) initiative, supported by the Cancer Institute NSWs Translational Cancer Research Centre infrastructure program grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRadiation therapy is a common cancer treatment, requiring timely information to help patients prepare for treatment. We pilot tested a low literacy, psycho-educational talking book (written booklet, with accompanying audio recording) to examine (i) the effect of the tool on knowledge, anxiety and communication; (ii) acceptability, and (iii) how it was used in appointments.

methodsA pre-post design was employed. Patients scheduled to receive radiation therapy for any cancer were recruited from two hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Participants were sent the talking book before treatment planning and completed baseline and follow-up surveys, before and after the intervention.

resultsForty participants were recruited, and 39 completed all study assessments. Overall, knowledge increased after receiving the talking book by 3.8 points from 13.9 to 17.7/20 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.7, 4.8, P < 0.001). Anxiety and concerns were significantly lower after receiving the talking book (P = 0.015 and P = 0.004, respectively). Nearly half of participants (s = 17, 48%) reported using the book during appointments. Most reported finding it easier to communicate (n = 31, 89%) and to ask more questions (n = 21, 62%).

conclusionThe talking book shows promise in improving knowledge, reducing anxiety and enhancing communication. Strategies to support the implementation of the talking book are required. Further studies to translate the book into different languages are also planned.

Indexed as

CommunicationLiteracyAnxietyBooksHumansPilot ProjectsCancerCommunicationHealth literacyKnowledgeRadiation therapyTalking book

Identifiers

PMID35839313
PMCPMC9714514

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.