ArticleBMC primary care2024
Perceptions of the 2D short animated videos for literacy against chronic diseases among adults with diabetes and/or hypertension: a qualitative study in primary care clinics.
Article in BMC primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Mobile-Based Mindfulness Intervention for Reducing Demoralization in Patients on Maintenance Hemodialysis: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- Prediabetes Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices, and Risk Levels in the United Arab Emirates: A Cross-Sectional Study.Cureus · 2025Article
- Wandering at the crossroads of using a smartphone among nursing home residents: A qualitative descriptive study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnimation has promise for teaching complex health content through smartphone applications. However, smartphones have had limited use in Thailand for health literacy improvement among adults with chronic diseases. This study aims to explore the perceptions of adults with diabetes and/or hypertension resulting from 2D short animated videos for literacy against chronic disease that are available via smartphones.
methodsFour animated videos were initially developed based on clinical practice guidelines and nursing experience. Physicians, an expert in health education, and an animation team developed and revised scripts and storyboards of the animated videos. Lastly, videos were validated by physicians and health educators for content breadth and depth and by media experts for motion graphics and illustration. Each video presents a different situation in diabetes, hypertension, missing appointments, and obesity, ranging from 2.18 to 4.14 min in duration. The inclusion criteria were adults 35-70 years old with diabetes or hypertension who received care from primary care units. Thematic analysis was performed on the extracted data.
resultsTwenty participants with a mean age of 58.4 years (SD 6.7; ranged 41-68) were focus-group interviewed. Three animation elements were assessed, including presentation, impacts, and suggestions. Participants had positive responses regarding the presentation (suitability of images and smooth motion graphics, short length of videos, simple language, understandable content, and clear sound) and impacts (recalling information, enhancing engagement, and motivating health awareness and behavior change). Suggested improvements were for a bigger font size for subtitles and considering the use of spoken text instead of on-screen text for recommendations at the end of the animations.
conclusionsAnimated videos are acceptable for delivering health information. Pilot testing animated videos for promoting literacy against chronic diseases in adults with diabetes and hypertension is needed for optimal utility.
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.