ArticleBMC health services research2025
Assessing organizational health literacy in hospitals by using the International Self-Assessment Tool for Organizational Health Literacy of Hospitals - a feasibility study in six European countries.
Article 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Organisational health literacy in healthcare in Europe: a content analysis to explore stakeholders perspectives for supporting the adoption of effective strategies and interventions.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Organizational health literacy in Austria-policy developments and results from a pilot assessment in primary care.Frontiers in public health · 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
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHospitals can gain valuable insights into their current level of organizational health literacy (OHL) by using self-assessment tools. OHL self-assessment tools can serve as useful instruments for supporting the planning and implementation of OHL interventions aimed at promoting health equity and improving patient outcomes. This explorative study aimed to pilot the International Self-Assessment Tool for Organizational Health Literacy (Responsiveness) of Hospitals (OHL-Hos) among hospitals across six countries.
methodsThe OHL-Hos, grounded in a comprehensive theoretical framework consisting of eight standards, 21 sub-standards and 141 indicators, was piloted in seven hospitals: one in Austria, Germany, the Czech Republic, Norway and Serbia, and two in Italy. In each hospital, the feasibility of using the OHL-Hos was investigated regarding acceptability, implementation, practicality, and integration, identifying strengths and areas for improvement using descriptive analyses. The self-assessment process included individual rating of an interdisciplinary and inter-hierarchical assessment team regarding OHL-Hos indicators from their personal perspectives, followed by a joint assessment to reach a consensus on different ratings. The process and experiences were documented in semi-structured forms, while the ratings on the indicators were documented numerically.
resultsAll hospitals successfully self-assessed their OHL, identifying strengths and areas for improvement. The self-assessment process varied slightly among countries. While the tool was considered important but lengthy and complex, introductory workshops facilitated successful implementation. The self-assessment process raised awareness and stimulated discussions on improving OHL, highlighting the tool's potential for organizational development.
conclusionsThe OHL-Hos can serve as a useful tool to identify strengths and areas for improvement in OHL in hospitals. The overall experience with the tool was positive and the joint assessment with the tool was found to foster consensus and enable reflection on OHL, but its comprehensive nature poses challenges to its implementation, leading to recommendations for developing a shortened version of the tool with simple language. Certain indicators require specific knowledge, suggesting different professional groups should address relevant parts.
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.