Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37073460›Full record

ArticleHealth education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education2023

Teaching Health Literacy and Digital Literacy Together at University Level: The FLOURISH Module.

Alan F Smeaton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

1 author.

Alan F SmeatonDublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-1028-8389

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many universities have wellness programs to promote overall health and well-being. Using students' own personal data as part of improving their own wellness would seem to be a natural fit given that most university students are already data and information literate. In this work, we aim to show how the interplay between health literacy and data literacy can be used and taught together. The method we use is the development and delivery of the FLOURISH module, an accredited, online-only but extra-curricular course that delivers practical tips in the areas that impact students' everyday wellness including sleep, nutrition, work habits, procrastination, relationships with others, physical activity, positive psychology, critical thinking, and more. For most of these topics, students gather personal data related to the topic and submit an analysis of their data for assessment thus demonstrating how students can use their personal data for their benefit. More than 350 students have taken the module and an analysis of the use of online resources, as well as feedback on the module experience, are presented. The contributions of this article are to further endorse the need for health literacy and digital literacy for students, and we demonstrate that these can be taught together making each literacy more appealing to the digital natives of Generation Z who make up the majority of students. The implications for public health research and practice are that two student literacies, health and digital, are not independent and for our students, they should be taught together.

Indexed as

Health LiteracyHealth PromotionHumansNutritional StatusStudentsUniversitiesdata literacyhealth literacypersonal datastudent wellness

Identifiers

PMID37073460
PMCPMC10492429

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.