Associations Between Health Literacy and Health Outcomes in a Predominantly Low-Income African American Population with Type 2 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inadequate health literacy has been associated with poorer health behaviors and outcomes in individuals with diabetes or depression. This study was conducted to examine the associations between inadequate health literacy and behavioral and cardiometabolic parameters in individuals with type 2 diabetes and to explore whether these associations are affected by concurrent depression. The authors used cross-sectional data from a study of 343 predominantly African Americans with type 2 diabetes. Inadequate health literacy was significantly and modestly associated with diabetes knowledge (r = -0.34) but weakly associated with self-efficacy (r = 0.16) and depressive symptoms (r = 0.24). In multivariate regression models, there were no associations between health literacy and A1c, blood pressure, or body mass index or control of any of these parameters. There was no evidence that depression was an effect-modifier of the associations between health literacy and outcomes. Although inadequate health literacy was modestly associated with worse knowledge and weakly associated with self-efficacy, it was not associated with any of the cardiometabolic parameters the authors studied. Because this study showed no association between health literacy and behavioral and cardiometabolic outcomes, it is unseemly and premature to embark on trials or controlled interventions to improve health literacy for the purposes of improving patient-related outcomes in diabetes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".