An Interactive Communication Model for Self-Care—Regardless of Health Literacy: Protocol for a Quasi-Experimental Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clear dialogue-based (interactive) communication that ensures comprehension and recall becomes more important in patient-provider interactions, especially in relation to patients with chronic diseases, where self-management education and counseling are cornerstones in managing these diseases. If patients with chronic disease experience challenges in obtaining, understanding, and applying health-related information (necessary to make informed health decisions and sufficiently manage their health), clear communication and ensuring comprehension become even more critical in the patient-provider interactions. Furthermore, patient-provider communication has been proposed as a potential pathway through which health literacy might influence health outcomes, especially in individuals with chronic diseases. Hence, adjusting communication to the individual level of health literacy might have a positive influence on health outcomes. On this basis, the authors have developed a web-based interactive communication model that both seeks to accommodate health literacy by allowing tailored communication and ensure comprehension and recall between nurses and patients. OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to examine the use of an IT solution that comprises an interactive communication model that seeks to accommodate health literacy in communication and ensure comprehension and recall between nurses and patients. METHODS: A quasi-experimental control group study including full economic evaluation with 6-month follow-up. Based on power calculation, a total of 82 participants will be included. Participants are assigned either the interactive communication model (intervention) or usual nursing care. It will be assessed if the model influences the level of health literacy and participants experience a higher health-related quality of life. Further, cost-effectiveness will be evaluated. Overall, the statistical methods will follow an intention-to-treat principle. Results will be presented in accordance with the Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomized Designs guidelines for nonrandomized designs as well as the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. RESULTS: This paper describes a protocol for a clustered quasi-experimental control study that seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of the interactive communicative model. Most studies in the field of health literacy are epidemiological studies that seek to address the effects of poor health literacy in populations and its potential impact on health inequity. A total of 82 participants, who receive community nursing will be included. The final trial day is May 1, 2022, with the first report of results in the final quarter of 2022. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the trial can create the base for conducting a large-scale study and inspire the conduction of more studies that seeks to create and evaluate interventions aimed at enhancing the level of health literacy and reducing the usage of health resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04929314; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04929314. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/37673.
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 | 0.030 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.008 |
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".