Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38095184›Full record

ArticleHealth (London, England : 1997)2025

Narratives about distributed health literacy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Susana Silva, Helena Machado, Ilaria Galasso, Bettina M Zimmermann, Carlo Botrugno

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health (London, England : 1997), 2025. 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. 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

5 authors.

Susana SilvaInstitute for Social Sciences, University of Minho, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1335-8648
Helena MachadoInstitute for Social Sciences, University of Minho, Portugal.
Ilaria GalassoUniversity College Dublin, Ireland.
Bettina M ZimmermannInstitute for Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Switzerland.
Carlo BotrugnoResearch Unit on Everyday Bioethics and Ethics of Science, Department of Legal Sciences, University of Florence, Italy.

Funding

European Research Council 771217
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The promotion of health literacy was a key public health strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the role of social networks and relationships for support with health literacy-related tasks in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic is scarcely understood. Moving beyond traditional notions of health literacy, which focus on individual skills and knowledge, this study uses the concept of distributed health literacy to explore how individuals make meaning of and respond to health literacy and make their literacy skills available to others through their relational and socially situated and lived experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on 89 semi-structured interviews conducted in three European countries (Italy, Portugal, and Switzerland) between October and December 2021, we found narratives of stabilization, hybridization, and disruption that show how health literacy concerning COVID-19 is a complex social construct intertwined with emotional, cognitive, and behavioral responses distributed among individuals, communities, and institutions within socioeconomic and political contexts that affect their existence. This paper opens new empirical directions to understand the critical engagement of individuals and communities toward health information aimed at making sense of a complex and prolonged situation of uncertainty in a pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health LiteracyNarrationAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicItalyMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsPortugalQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2SwitzerlandCOVID-19critical health literacydistributed health literacyliteracy mediators

Identifiers

PMID38095184
PMCPMC11660513

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.