ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2025
[Development and evaluation of an assessment tool for organisational health literacy].
Article in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundIn research on organisational health literacy (OHL), there is a lack of standardised assessment tools for measuring and comparing the OHL of different organisations. This article therefore examines (1) which criteria for assessing OHL can be derived from research and practice, (2) how these are implemented in organisations and (3) the psychometric properties of a questionnaire developed from them. METHODOLOGY: OHL criteria were identified by means of literature research and workshops. The criteria were agreed upon in a Delphi study and an assessment tool was developed. An online questionnaire was developed and psychometrically tested. Measures such as Cronbach's alpha, item selectivity and difficulty, and floor/ceiling effects were used for the analysis.
resultsOver 500 criteria were identified and an assessment tool of 77 criteria (5 main categories and 17 sub-categories) was developed. The subject of "Barrier-free access and navigation" was best implemented in healthcare organisations. The psychometric properties showed a good to excellent internal consistency of the questionnaire structure. Only one main category showed significant floor effects; there were no ceiling effects. At the item level, ceiling effects were found for 13 items, and 39 items showed a satisfactory discriminatory power. DISCUSSION: OHL is a multidimensional construct that is well represented by the assessment tool. Further validation with larger samples is necessary for the use of the tool as a questionnaire for measuring OHL and for comparison between institutions. A reduction in the number of criteria can improve the consistency of the content of the main and sub-categories.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39945781What 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.