SynthesisHealth promotion international2024
How researchers can translate health evidence into books for children.
Synthesis in Health promotion international, 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.
- Perceptions of air pollution and health communication for people with asthma among Australia's Arabic-speaking communities.Health promotion international · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The health promotion literature that considers how scientific evidence can be effectively communicated tends to focus on evaluating the effectiveness of communication materials. This has resulted in a knowledge gap regarding effective knowledge translation processes. This study explores the process, reasoning and practices for developing books for children that incorporate evidence-based information to aid understanding of scientific evidence about health and environmental or natural disasters. This study is informed by a systematic review of the literature combined with responses to an email interview with authors of books for children. Nine published studies were included in the systematic review. Twenty-two authors responded to the email survey (25% response rate, following 86 invitations). We report seven key findings to guide the development of health-promoting books for children: (i) understand the needs and expectations of the audience, (ii) articulate the topic and research evidence, (iii) assemble a team with a mix of content knowledge and creative expertise, (iv) format should be chosen to suit the user group and guided by the creative team, (v) early testing with children and their support system is crucial, (vi) develop a dissemination strategy to reach the user group and (vii) engage in reflexivity through evaluation of effectiveness of messaging. The current investigation can guide the process, reasoning and practice of developing books for children that incorporate evidence about health and environmental disasters.
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.