Trial reportBMC medical education2024
Teach back educational strategy on knowledge about breast cancer among low health literate women.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Breast cancer in Bosnia and Herzegovina: real-world patterns of diagnosis, treatment, and survival outcomes.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Clear Conversations: a mixed methods evaluation of a verbal health literacy initiative for health service providers.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Exploring perceptual disparities: A study on the level of understanding of colorectal cancer care among patients and healthcare professionals.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- Empowering patients through effective communication: The teach-back method as a tool for health literacy.Health promotion perspectives · 2025Article
- Understanding Breast Cancer: Awareness, Risk Factors, and Symptoms Among Female Health Science Students in Hungary.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Traditional Chinese Medicine Combined Group Psychotherapy Experiences Among Colorectal Cancer Survivors: A Secondary Qualitative Analysis.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis randomized controlled trial examines the effectiveness of a "teach-back" educational strategy in increasing knowledge about breast cancer among women with low health literacy.
methodsData collection for this study was conducted at the Farabi Comprehensive Health Services Center in Sanandaj, Iran, between December 2020 and October 2022. In this randomized controlled trial, 84 women who had low health literacy were randomly allocated into groups of the study (teach back, and control groups). The educational intervention focused on increasing knowledge of breast cancer risk factors, signs and symptoms, early detection methods (including breast self-examination), and the importance of regular screening. The intervention group received 3 face to face education within three weekly sessions, each lasting 20 min. The Health Literacy Instrument for Adults (HELIA), breast cancer knowledge was measured by valid tool and compared in the two groups before and eight weeks after the interventions.
resultsMean scores of breast cancer knowledge revealed significant differences between intervention group and control group (P < 0.001) eight weeks after intervention. There were significant differences between baseline and follow-up measurement scores demonstrating that there were differences in the participants' breast cancer knowledge (P < 0.001), and diagnosis technique knowledge (P < 0.008), between the intervention and control groups.
conclusionTeach Back educational strategy increased knowledge breast cancer among low health literacy women. Teach Back educational strategy seems to be effective for women with low health literacy.
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.