Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37213777›Full record

ArticlePEC innovation2022

Documenting limited health literacy in a clinical setting.

Julie Nguyen, Caitlyn McNaughton, Jessica Sautter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PEC innovation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Empowering Recovery: A Co-Designed Intervention to Transform Care for Operable Lung Cancer.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Julie NguyenDepartment of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University of the Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Caitlyn McNaughtonAnn B. Barshinger Cancer Institute, Penn Medicine Lancaster General Health, Lancaster, PA, USA.
Jessica SautterDepartment of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University of the Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Health literacy is important in lung cancer care, where treatments and symptoms are difficult to navigate. This study aims to describe how a single-item measure of health literacy can facilitate health literacy system capacity. Methods: Data include retrospective medical records from 456 patients with lung cancer. Limited or adequate health literacy was based on participant response to the Single Item Literacy Screener (SILS). Data were collected over a 12-month period following diagnosis for each patient. Results: One-third of patients had limited health literacy; they were more likely to have lung cancers of stage IIIB or higher and greater median levels of depression based on the PHQ-9 questionnaire. Patients with limited health literacy were also more likely to have at least one emergency department visit or unplanned hospitalization and had these visits sooner. Conclusion: These data document need for interventions to buffer the association between limited health literacy and poor health outcomes. Innovation: Routine intake screens should include the SILS to measure health literacy among lung cancer patients. New models that address health literacy at the organizational and patient levels can be implemented in health care settings using the SILS.

Indexed as

Cancerelectronic medical recordhealthcare utilizationquality of life

Identifiers

PMID37213777
PMCPMC10194334

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.