ArticlePEC innovation2024
Adaptation of a health literacy screener for computerized, self-administered use by U.S. adults.
Article in PEC innovation, 2024. 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.
- Health literacy and COVID-19 pandemic impacts among adults in rural northern Arizona.Rural and remote health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Health literacy is a critical health determinant, for which few computerized, self-administered assessments exist. This study adapted and tested the reliability of the Newest Vital Sign© (NVS) as a computerized, self-administered health literacy screener. Methods: Phase one involved 33 participants to create response options for a computerized, self-administered NVS (C-NVS). Phase two was a randomized crossover trial to test the consistency of C-NVS and original, interviewer-administered NVS (I-NVS) scores in 89 participants. Results: Linear mixed-effects regression model results showed a significant carryover effect ( Conclusion and innovation: Findings suggest learning can occur when health literacy screeners are administered more than once in less than a month's time and computerized, self-administered health literacy screeners may produce ceiling effects. A universal precautions approach to health literacy therefore remains germane.
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.