Trial reportFrontiers in public health2026
Improving health literacy of patients with pulmonary embolism through evidence-based health information: a feasibility study.
Trial report in Frontiers in public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common condition with significant physical and psychological impairments. This study was intended to examine the feasibility of how evidence-based health information on PE in the form of a brochure can be distributed and used to strengthen PE-specific health literacy. Materials and methods: Patients with PE were recruited during their hospital stay and were randomized in an intervention group which was provided with the brochure and a control group. Questionnaires were completed at baseline and four months after PE. Primary focus of the study were feasibility metrics such as recruitment and dropout rates, suitability of randomization processes, and the acceptance of the intervention. Health literacy was assessed using the Health Literacy Pulmonary Embolism (HeLP) questionnaire to gather information about expected effect sizes of the intervention. Further patient-oriented and information-related outcomes (e.g., health-related quality of life, mental well-being, communication with treating physicians and relatives) were assessed as secondary outcomes during follow-up. Additional qualitative interviews in the intervention group were conducted for further information on acceptance and usage patterns of the brochure. Results: At baseline, 116 of 249 hospitalized patients with PE were enrolled in the study. Seventy-five participants (intervention: 33, control: 42) completed the follow-up, representing a response rate of 65%. PE-specific health literacy was significantly improved in the domain 'dealing with PE-related health information' in the intervention group (3.86 vs. 3.43, Conclusion: Provision of evidence-based health information via a brochure is feasible and may enhance PE-specific health literacy and patient knowledge. Challenges regarding distribution strategies, effective implementation and long-term effects should be considered in future studies.
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.