ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2026
Evaluating the Health Literacy Characteristics of Question Prompt Lists on National Cancer Institute Designated Cancer Center Websites.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ineffective communication between cancer survivors and providers can contribute to health disparities. Question Prompt Lists (QPLs) help facilitate patient-provider communication; however little research has evaluated the tool. This study evaluated the characteristics of QPLs available on National Cancer Institute (NCI)-Designated Cancer Center websites. A cross-sectional content analysis was conducted on 64 NCI-Designated Cancer Center websites. Eighty-nine QPLs were coded based on the Information Literacy Framework and the National Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) Standards. The readability, actionability, understandability, clarity, and suitability of QPLs were evaluated using validated tools to determine their utility in supporting diverse cancer survivors. Thirty-nine centers (59.1%) provided a total of 89 QPLs, averaging 16.4 questions (SD ± 10.4) per list. No QPLs (0%) were created for a specific race/ethnicity or who identify with sexual and gender minority populations. Six (6.7%) were created based on age and seven (7.9%) were available in multiple languages. Common topics included diagnosis (68.5%) and treatment (79.8%). Twenty QPLs (29.2%) were available as PDFs, and most (70.8%) were not cancer-type specific. While most QPLs (76.4%) demonstrated good understandability, 62.9% had poor actionability, 82.0% exhibited superior suitability, and 92.1% had suboptimal clarity. The average readability was seventh grade. Cancer centers should develop QPLs that address diverse cultural and communication needs. Despite their importance, most QPLs lacked inclusivity. Additionally, while understandability was generally high, actionability and clarity were suboptimal, potentially limiting their effectiveness in guiding patient-provider discussions. Using validated tools before dissemination aligns with best practices to improve patient-centered care while reducing health disparities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40583080What 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.