Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40194870›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Applying co-design health literacy development in Australian prisons: protocol for system-wide application of the Optimising Health Literacy and Access (Ophelia) process.

Scott W Gill, Julia Bowman, Christina Cheng, Caron Shaw, Stephen Hampton, Wendy Hoey, Richard H Osborne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Developing a validity testing plan for a patient-reported outcome measure in a new context using the argument-based approach to validity.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Scott W GillCentre for Global Health and Equity, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia swgill@swin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0427-1639
Julia BowmanJustice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network, Matraville, New South Wales, Australia.
Christina ChengCentre for Global Health and Equity, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8950-7689
Caron ShawClinical Excellence Commission, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Stephen HamptonJustice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network, Matraville, New South Wales, Australia.
Wendy HoeyJustice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network, Matraville, New South Wales, Australia.
Richard H OsborneCentre for Global Health and Equity, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPrisons present both unique opportunities and challenges for delivering healthcare to individuals who often experience significant vulnerabilities and often have poor health outcomes. Actions and solutions informed by the health literacy strengths and challenges (ie, health literacy-informed interventions) of people in prison offer an opportunity to build fit-for-purpose and effective interventions in this unique context. This study aims to adapt and apply the three-phase Optimising Health Literacy and Access (Ophelia) process in a state-wide prison context to generate codesigned improvements in information, resources and services for people in prison. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Health Literacy Questionnaire data from 471 people in prison will be analysed using descriptive and cluster analyses (Ophelia Phase 1). Clusters, with qualitative interview data, will then inform vignette development for use in ideas generation workshops and yarning circles with stakeholders to develop health literacy-informed interventions. Selection, prioritisation and testing of identified interventions will be undertaken (Phase 2), followed by implementation and evaluation (Phase 3). This project will advance intervention development in the prison context, enabling the voice of people in prison and service providers to be heard through codesign. The protocol will inform the development and implementation of interventions to systematically improve the delivery of information, services and resources for people in prison, which may be relevant to prison healthcare authorities globally. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval to undertake Phase 1 of the Ophelia process has been granted from the following Human Research Ethics Committees: Swinburne University of Technology (Ref: 20236977-15461), Justice Health NSW (Ref: 2022/ETH01433), Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council (Ref: 2007/22) and the Corrective Services Ethics Committee (Ref: D2022/1452326). Dissemination of the study findings will be the Justice Health NSW codesign process and ownership of the project through authentic engagement with people with lived experience and health and corrective staff. It will also be disseminated through publication in a PhD thesis, peer-reviewed research papers and conference presentations.

Indexed as

Health LiteracyHealth Services AccessibilityPrisonersPrisonsAustraliaHumansQualitative ResearchResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesHealth EquityHealth LiteracyHealth ServicesOrganisational developmentPrisonsPUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID40194870
PMCPMC11977488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.