ArticleScientific reports2025
Risk factors associated with health literacy among community residents in China based on multiple correspondence analysis and ordinal logistic regression.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health literacy and digital health service use among community residents in Taiwan: implications from a pilot assessment using the HLS-SF12.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Health Literacy and Access to Care among Patients with and Without Traumatic Brain Injury: An All of Us Analysis.NeuroRehabilitation · 2026Article
- Determinants of loss to follow-up after eye-related emergency visits: A race-stratified analysis at a level I trauma center.PloS one · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health literacy is crucial in individuals' ability to make informed health decisions and manage chronic conditions. This study aimed to assess the levels of health literacy and identify socio-demographic factors associated with health literacy among residents aged 15-69 years in Baiyun District, Guangzhou. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 2630 participants using the China Health Literacy Survey (CHLS) questionnaire between 2019 and 2024. Ordinal logistic regression (OLR) was performed to identify factors associated with health literacy. Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) was used to explore the interrelationships between categorical variables such as age, education, and health literacy. The mean health literacy score was 47.31 (SD = 11.41), with 34.5% of participants having adequate health literacy. The OLR results showed that lower education levels were significantly associated with a reduced likelihood of having adequate health literacy. Participants with less than junior high school education ([Formula: see text] = -1.71, 95% CI: -2.06, -1.37, P < 0.001) and those with junior or senior high school education ([Formula: see text] = -1.24, 95% CI: -1.40, -1.07, P < 0.001) were less likely to have adequate health literacy compared to those with college or higher education. Age was also significantly associated with health literacy, with younger participants (aged 15-44 years) having a higher likelihood of adequate health literacy ([Formula: see text] = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.58, 1.06, P < 0.001). MCA further revealed that younger, higher-educated individuals clustered in the upper-left quadrant, reflecting higher health literacy, while older, less-educated individuals were positioned in the lower-right quadrant, indicating lower health literacy. Education and age were significant determinants of health literacy in Baiyun District, Guangzhou. These findings emphasize the need for targeted health literacy interventions, particularly for older and less-educated populations. Public health policies should focus on improving educational opportunities and providing tailored health education programs to enhance health literacy, thereby reducing health disparities.
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.