Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Many patient education materials (PEMs) available on the internet are written at high school or college reading levels, rendering them inaccessible to the average US resident, who reads at or below an 8 th grade level. Currently, electronic health record (EHR) providers partner with companies that produce PEMs, allowing clinicians to access PEMs at the point of care. Objective To assess the readability of PEMs provided by a popular EHR vendor as well as the National Library of Medicine (NLM). Design We included PEMs from Micromedex, EBSCO, and MedlinePlus. Micromedex and EBSCO supply PEMs to Meditech, a popular EHR supplier in the US. MedlinePlus supplies the NLM. These PEM databases have high market penetration and accessibility. Measurements Grade reading level of the PEMs was calculated using three validated indices: Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), Gunning Fog (GFI), and Flesch–Kincaid (FKI). The percentage of documents above target readability and average readability scores from each database were calculated. Results We randomly sampled 100 disease-matched PEMs from three databases (n = 300 PEMs). Depending on the readability index used, 30-100% of PEMs were written above the 8 th grade level. The average reading level for MedlinePlus, EBSCO, and Micromedex PEMs was 10.2 (1.9), 9.7 (1.3), and 8.6 (0.9), respectively (p ≤ 0.000) as estimated by the GFI. Estimates of readability using SMOG and FKI were similar. Conclusions The majority of PEMS available through the NLM and a popular EHR were written at reading levels considerably higher than that of the average US adult.

The increasing amount of health information available on the internet makes it more important than ever to ensure that people can judge the accuracy of this information to prevent them from harm. It may be possible for platforms to set up protective mechanisms depending on the level of digital health literacy and thereby to decrease the possibility of harm by the misuse of health information. This study aimed to create an instrument for digital health literacy assessment (DHLA) based on the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) to categorize participants by level of risk of misinterpreting health information into high-, medium-, and low-risk groups. This study developed a DHLA and constructed an online health information bank with correct and incorrect answers. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to detect the cutoff value of DHLA, using 5 items randomly selected from the online health information bank, to classify users as being at low, medium, or high risk of misjudging health information. This provided information about the relationship between risk group for digital health literacy and accurate judgement of online health information. The study participants were Taiwanese residents aged 20 years and older. Snowball sampling was used, and internet questionnaires were anonymously completed by the participants. The reliability and validity of DHLA were examined. Logistic regression was used to analyze factors associated with risk groups from the DHLA. This study collected 1588 valid questionnaires. The online health information bank included 310 items of health information, which were classified as easy (147 items), moderate (122 items), or difficult (41 items) based on the difficulty of judging their accuracy. The internal consistency of DHLA was satisfactory (α=.87), and factor analysis of construct validity found three factors, accounting for 76.6% of the variance. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis found 106 people at high risk, 1368 at medium risk, and 114 at low risk of misinterpreting health information. Of the original grouped cases, 89.6% were correctly classified after discriminate analysis. Logistic regression analysis showed that participants with a high risk of misjudging health information had a lower education level, lower income, and poorer health. They also rarely or never browsed the internet. These differences were statistically significant. The DHLA score could distinguish those at low, medium, and high risk of misjudging health information on the internet. Health information platforms on the internet could consider incorporating DHLA to set up a mechanism to protect users from misusing health information and avoid harming their health.

BackgroundPatient misunderstanding of prescription drug label instructions is a common cause of unintentional misuse of medication and adverse health outcomes. Those with limited literacy and English proficiency are at greater risk.ObjectiveTo test the effectiveness of a patient-centered drug label strategy, including a Universal Medication Schedule (UMS), to improve proper regimen use and adherence compared to a current standard.DesignTwo-arm, multi-site patient-randomized pragmatic trial.ParticipantsEnglish- and Spanish-speaking patients from eight community health centers in northern Virginia who received prescriptions from a central-fill pharmacy and who were 1) ≥30 years of age, 2) diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and/or hypertension, and 3) taking ≥2 oral medications.InterventionA patient-centered label (PCL) strategy that incorporated evidence-based practices for format and content, including prioritized information, larger font size, and increased white space. Most notably, instructions were conveyed with the UMS, which uses standard intervals for expressing when to take medicine (morning, noon, evening, bedtime).Main MeasuresDemonstrated proper use of a multi-drug regimen; medication adherence measured by self-report and pill count at 3 and 9 months.Key ResultsA total of 845 patients participated in the study (85.6 % cooperation rate). Patients receiving the PCL demonstrated slightly better proper use of their drug regimens at first exposure (76.9 % vs. 70.1 %, p = 0.06) and at 9 months (85.9 % vs. 77.4 %, p = 0.03). The effect of the PCL was significant for English-speaking patients (OR 2.21, 95 % CI 1.13–4.31) but not for Spanish speakers (OR 1.19, 95 % CI 0.63–2.24). Overall, the intervention did not improve medication adherence. However, significant benefits from the PCL were found among patients with limited literacy (OR 5.08, 95 % CI 1.15–22.37) and for those with medications to be taken ≥2 times a day (OR 2.77, 95 % CI 1.17–6.53).ConclusionsA simple modification to pharmacy-generated labeling, with minimal investment required, can offer modest improvements to regimen use and adherence, mostly among patients with limited literacy and more complex regimens.Trial Registration (ClinicalTrials.gov): NCT00973180, NCT01200849

Lack of knowledge regarding, and the stigma associated with, mental disorders have been identified as major obstacles for the promotion of mental health and early intervention. The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a school-based intervention program focused on the promotion of mental health literacy (MHL) in young people (“Finding Space for Mental Health”). A sample of 543 students (22 classes), aged between 12 and 14 years old, participated in the study. Each class of students was randomly assigned to the control group (CG; n = 284; 11 classes) or the experimental group (EG; n = 259; 11 classes). MHL was assessed using the Mental Health Literacy questionnaire (MHLq), which is comprised of three dimensions—Knowledge/Stereotypes, First Aid Skills and Help Seeking, and Self-Help Strategies. The scores on these dimensions can also be combined to give an overall or total score. Participants from the EG attended the MHL promotion program (two sessions, 90 min each) delivered at one-week intervals. Sessions followed an interactive methodology, using group dynamics, music, and videos adapted to the target group. All participants responded to the MHLq at three points in time: pre-intervention assessment (one week prior to the intervention), post-intervention assessment (one week after the intervention) and follow-up assessment (six months after the intervention). The intervention effectiveness and the differential impact of sociodemographic variables on the effectiveness of the program were studied using a Generalized Estimation Equation (GEE). Results revealed that participants from the EG demonstrated, on average, significantly higher improvement in MHL from pre-intervention to follow-up when compared to participants from the CG. Different sociodemographic variables affected the effectiveness of the program on distinct dimensions of the MHLq. Overall, “Finding Space for Mental Health” showed efficacy as a short-term promotion program for improving MHL in schools.

Adolescence offers a window of opportunity during which improvements in health behaviours could benefit long-term health, and enable preparation for parenthood—albeit a long way off, passing on good health prospects to future children. This study was carried out to evaluate whether an educational intervention, which engages adolescents in science, can improve their health literacy and behaviours. A cluster-randomised controlled trial of 38 secondary schools in England, UK was conducted. The intervention (LifeLab) drew on principles of education, psychology and public health to engage students with science for health literacy, focused on the message “Me, my health and my children’s health”. The programme comprised: • Professional development for teachers. • A 2–3 week module of work for 13-14-year-olds. • A “hands-on” practical health science day visit to a dedicated facility in a university teaching hospital. Data were collected from 2929 adolescents (aged 13–14 years) at baseline and 2487 (84.9%) at 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome was change in theoretical health literacy from pre- to 12 months post- intervention. This study is registered (ISRCTN71951436) and the trial status is complete. Participation in the LifeLab educational intervention was associated with an increase in the students’ standardised total theoretical health literacy score (adjusted difference between groups = 0.27 SDs (95%CI = 0.12, 0.42)) at 12-month follow-up. There was an indication that intervention participants subsequently judged their own lifestyles more critically than controls, with fewer reporting their behaviours as healthy (53.4% vs. 59.5%; adjusted PRR = 0.94 [0.87, 1.01]). We conclude that experiencing LifeLab led to improved health literacy in adolescents and that they demonstrated a move towards a more critical judgement of health behaviour 12 months after the intervention. Further work is needed to examine whether this leads to sustained behaviour change, and whether other activities are needed to support this change.

Amid the alarming global forecast of age-related cognitive-communicative disorders like dementia, Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) are poised to play a crucial role in dementia-related services, ranging from counselling to end-of-life care. A key step in this direction is enhancing public health literacy regarding optimal age-linked cognitive-communicative health. Given the potential of educational multimedia (EM) programs to promote public health literacy, and the recent development of one such EM in our research, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of an SLP-designed and facilitated EM in changing young adults (YAs) knowledge and beliefs about cognitive health in the Indian context. In a randomized controlled trial, 220 YAs aged 18–25 years were equally and randomly assigned to either the experimental group (EG) or the active control group (CG). The EG viewed an EM on cognitive health, while the CG watched an animated fictional video. Both groups completed a retrospective pre-post survey evaluating self-perceived knowledge, factual knowledge, and beliefs about cognitive health. The effect of the EM was analyzed using mixed-model ANOVA. A significant improvement in the EG compared to the CG across all three domains was observed. These findings highlight the efficacy of the EM in enhancing understanding and attitudes toward cognitive health among YAs. The EM shows promise as a structured cognitive health education tool, fostering awareness, encouraging preventive measures, and potentially contributing to early detection and intervention of cognitive health issues. This study aligns with the emerging role of SLPs in educating communities about cognitive-communicative health and well-being.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a robot‐assisted digital education method in reducing anxiety and promoting healthy behaviors among pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Design: A randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the impact of robot‐assisted health education with conventional video‐based education. Participants: A total of 66 pregnant women from a single hospital were randomly assigned to either the experimental group ( n  = 32) or the control group ( n  = 34). Outcomes: The primary outcome was the reduction of anxiety levels. Secondary outcomes included health education satisfaction, health literacy, and acceptance of technology. Results: The results indicated that the robot‐assisted digital education method significantly reduced anxiety levels among pregnant women. Additionally, participants in the experimental group reported higher satisfaction with health education, improved health literacy, and greater acceptance of technology compared to the control group. Conclusion: This study highlights the potential benefits of integrating robotic technology into health education for pregnant women. In the global information age, the findings provide valuable insights for educators and researchers in medical institutions aiming to enhance long‐term health education through innovative digital tools. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06999421

Background The aim of this study is to evaluate the short- and long-term effects of the universal mental health literacy intervention “EspaiJove.net” in increasing mental health knowledge, help seeking and reducing stigma attitudes in the adolescent population. We also examine whether these effects depend on the intervention intensity.  Methods A clustered school-based randomised controlled trial (cRCT) design. Subjects: 1,298 secondary pupils aged 13 and 14 were recruited from 18 schools in Barcelona (Spain) between September 2016 and January 2018. Intervention: Three programmes were assessed: 1) Sensitivity Programme (SP; 1 h); 2) Mental Health Literacy (MHL; 6 h); 3) MHL plus a first-person Stigma Reduction Programme (MHL + SR; 7 h); 4) Control group (CG): waiting list. Outcome measures: 1) MHL: EspaiJove.net EMHL Test (First part and Second Part); 2) Stigma: RIBS and CAMI; 3) Help-seeking and use of treatment: GHSQ. Analysis: The data was collected at baseline, post-intervention and 6 and 12 months later. An intention-to-treat analysis and imputation method was used to analyse the missing data. Intervention effects were analysed using multilevel modelling. Results One thousand thirty-two students were included (SP = 225; MHL = 261; MHL + SR = 295 and CG = 251). The MHL and MHL + SR interventions showed short- and long-term an increase in knowledge compared to SP and CG, but no significant change post-intervention or over time (First part p  = 0.52 and Second part p  = 0.62) between intervention groups and CG. No significant changes were found in stigma scores post-intervention or over time (CAMI p  = 0.61 and RIBS p  = 0.98) or in help-seeking scores (parent p  = 0.69; teacher p  = 0.23 and healthcare professional p  = 0.75). The MHL + SR intervention was the best valued and recommended ( p  < 0.005). Conclusions The three interventions of the EspaiJove.net programme (SP, MHL and MHL + SR) seem not to be effective in terms MHL, Stigma and help-seeking behaviours. The contact with a person who has experimented mental illness first-hand did not reduce stigma attitudes. Further research should deal with the heterogeneity of MHL interventions (concept, duration and measures) and identify which components of stigma interventions are effective. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03215654 (registration date 12 July 2017).

Objectives. To compare the effectiveness of 3 approaches for communicating opioid risk during an emergency department visit for a common painful condition. Methods. This parallel, multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted at 6 geographically disparate emergency department sites in the United States. Participants included adult patients between 18 and 70 years of age presenting with kidney stone or musculoskeletal back pain. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 risk communication strategies: (1) a personalized probabilistic risk visual aid, (2) a visual aid and a video narrative, or 3) general risk information. The primary outcomes were accuracy of risk recall, reported opioid use, and treatment preference at time of discharge. Results. A total of 1301 participants were enrolled between June 2017 and August 2019. There was no difference in risk recall at 14 days between the narrative and probabilistic groups (43.7% vs 38.8%; absolute risk reduction = 4.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = −2.98, 12.75). The narrative group had lower rates of preference for opioids at discharge than the general risk information group (25.9% vs 33.0%; difference = 7.1%; 95% CI = 0.64, 0.97). There were no differences in reported opioid use at 14 days between the narrative, probabilistic, and general risk groups (10.5%, 10.3%, and 13.3%, respectively; P = .44). Conclusions. An emergency medicine communication tool incorporating probabilistic risk and patient narratives was more effective than general information in mitigating preferences for opioids in the treatment of pain but was not more effective with respect to opioid use or risk recall. Trial Registration. Clinical Trials.gov identifier: NCT03134092. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S1):S45–S55. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306511 )

INTRODUCTION Low health literacy (LHL) remains a formidable barrier to improving health care quality and outcomes. Given the lack of precision of single demographic characteristics to predict health literacy, and the administrative burden and inability of existing health literacy measures to estimate health literacy at a population level, LHL is largely unaddressed in public health and clinical practice. To help overcome these limitations, we developed two models to estimate health literacy. METHODS We analyzed data from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL), using linear regression to predict mean health literacy scores and probit regression to predict the probability of an individual having ‘above basic’ proficiency. Predictors included gender, age, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, poverty status, marital status, language spoken in the home, metropolitan statistical area (MSA) and length of time in U.S. RESULTS All variables except MSA were statistically significant, with lower educational attainment being the strongest predictor. Our linear regression model and the probit model accounted for about 30% and 21% of the variance in health literacy scores, respectively, nearly twice as much as the variance accounted for by either education or poverty alone. CONCLUSIONS Multivariable models permit a more accurate estimation of health literacy than single predictors. Further, such models can be applied to readily available administrative or census data to produce estimates of average health literacy and identify communities that would benefit most from appropriate, targeted interventions in the clinical setting to address poor quality care and outcomes related to LHL.