Health literacy level in a various nephrology population from Québec: predialysis clinic, in-centre hemodialysis and home dialysis; a transversal monocentric observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health literacy refers to the ability of individuals to gain access to, use, and understand health information and services in order to maintain a good health. It is especially important in nephrology due to the complexity of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The present study sought to define health literacy levels in patients followed in predialysis clinic, in-center dialysis (ICHD), peritoneal dialysis (PD) and home hemodialysis (HHD). METHODS: This transversal monocentric observational study analysed 363 patients between October 2016 and April 2017. The Brief Health Literacy Screen (BHLS) and the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ) were used to measure health literacy. Multivariate linear regressions were used to compare the mean scores on the BHLS and HLQ, across the four groups. RESULTS: Patients on PD had a significantly higher BHLS'score than patients on ICHD (p = 0.04). HLQ's scores differed across the groups: patients on HHD (p = 0.01) and PD (p = 0.002) were more likely to feel understood by their healthcare providers. Compared to ICHD, patients on HHD were more likely to have sufficient information to manage their health (p = 0.02), and patients in the predialysis clinic were more likely to report high abilities for health information appraisal (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In a monocentric study, there is a significant proportion of CKD patients, especially in predialysis clinic and in-centre hemodialysis, with limited health literacy. Patients on home dialysis (HHD and PD) had a higher level of health literacy compared to the other groups.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".