Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40011860›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2025

Health literacy interventions and health literacy-related outcomes for older adults: a systematic review.

Neil Marshall, Michelle Butler, Veronica Lambert, Claire M Timon, David Joyce, Austin Warters

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Health Literacy is Not just Reading Ability: Rethinking Cancer Education for Older Adults.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Neil MarshallDCU REACH (Research and Engagement Across Community Health) Centre, Faculty of Science and Health, Dublin City University, Glasnevin Campus, Dublin 9, Glasnevin, D09 V209, Ireland. neil.marshall@dcu.ie.
Michelle ButlerSchool of Nursing, Psychotherapy and Community Health, Faculty of Science and Health, Dublin City University, Glasnevin, Dublin 9, Ireland.
Veronica LambertSchool of Nursing, Psychotherapy and Community Health, Faculty of Science and Health, Dublin City University, Glasnevin, Dublin 9, Ireland.
Claire M TimonSchool of Population Health, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
David JoyceDCU REACH (Research and Engagement Across Community Health) Centre, Faculty of Science and Health, Dublin City University, Glasnevin Campus, Dublin 9, Glasnevin, D09 V209, Ireland.
Austin WartersHealth Service Executive (HSE), Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlder adults, identified as 65 years and over, a population for which low health literacy is prevalent, represented most people attending primary health care services provided by the Health Service Executive (HSE) in Ireland in 2019. Any limitation in a person's health literacy, specifically their ability to access, understand and use health information, can affect their ability to make healthcare related decisions. Information on the evidence for health literacy interventions is also required by healthcare providers and policy makers to inform decision-making and service development to improve outcomes for older people. This review aimed to synthesise the evidence on health literacy interventions and health literacy-related outcomes for older adults. The specific objectives were to (1) identify what health literacy interventions exist in relation to older adults' ability to access, understand, and use health information, (2) determine the health literacy-related outcomes of these interventions, and (3) identify any trends or patterns which may exist between intervention type and outcome.

methodsThis review was conducted by following PRISMA guidelines. The electronic databases PubMed, Embase and Scopus were searched for relevant studies concerning health literacy interventions for older persons. Study data were subsequently analysed using a narrative thematic approach in the context of the three key health literacy characteristics; the ability to access, understand and use health information.

resultsThirty-four studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. The findings show a potential link between individual-focussed health literacy interventions and positive health literacy-related outcomes in relation to older persons' ability to understand and use health information. The review also found that use of health literacy level assessment tools varied with studies either using different tools for the same older adult cohort, or failing to assess pre-intervention health literacy levels altogether.

conclusionsThe potential trend found between individual-focused interventions and positive health literacy outcomes suggests that implementing health literacy-related interventions directly to the individual is key. Furthermore, our study found an inconsistency amongst the included studies in relation to the implementation of health literacy assessment tools, with different tools used across most studies, and some studies choosing not to utilise any assessment tool.

Indexed as

Health LiteracyAgedAged, 80 and overHumansIrelandPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID40011860
PMCPMC11863724

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.