MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

HEALTH LITERACY AND ITS IMPACT ON OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS WITH ATRIAL FIBRILLATION: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY

2025· article· en· W4410405224 on OpenAlexaff
Antonello Cocchieri, Elena Isotta Cristofori, Manuele Cesare

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal Supplements · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationProspective cohort studyCohortHealth literacyCohort studyLiteracyInternal medicineGerontologyHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Health literacy (HL) is a risk factor for clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular diseases. This study explored HL levels and their impact, alongside clinical and nursing factors, on mortality, hospital readmissions, and emergency department (ED) visits in patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods A prospective cohort study was conducted at an Italian university hospital among adults with atrial fibrillation as the primary medical diagnosis between December 2020 and June 2021. Data collection included HL levels and sociodemographic, clinical, and nursing–related variables (e.g., nursing diagnoses identified within the first 24 hours of hospitalization and the number of nursing interventions delivered during the hospital stay). Patients were followed for 12 months to assess the study outcomes. Cox proportional hazard models analyzed associations between HL, nursing and clinical complexities, and outcomes. Results Among 441 patients (mean age 73.6 ± 11.9 years), over 70% had inadequate HL. During follow–up, 138 patients were lost, while 57 (17.8%) died, 117 (38.6%) were readmitted, and 99 (35.9%) had ED visits. The number of nursing diagnoses predicted mortality in univariable (HR 1.23; 95% CI: 1.14–1.32; p‹0.001) and multivariable analysis (HR 1.18; 95% CI: 1.06–1.32; p‹0.005). The HL level independently predicted mortality (HR 1.40; 95% CI: 1.01–1.96; p‹0.05). For readmissions, predictors included age (HR 1.05; 95% CI: 1.03–1.07; p‹0.001), length of stay (HR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87–0.97; p‹0.005), number of nursing diagnoses (HR 1.30; 95% CI: 1.15–1.46; p‹0.001), and HL levels (HR 1.46; 95% CI: 1.15–1.86; p‹0.005). For ED visits, predictors included age (HR 1.04; 95% CI: 1.02–1.07; p‹0.001), number of nursing diagnoses (HR 1.42; 95% CI: 1.26–1.61; p‹0.001), and HL levels (HR 1.34; 95% CI: 1.01–1.79; p‹0.05). Length of stay and the number of chronic conditions were not found to be significant predictors of ED visits. Nursing interventions were not significant predictors of mortality; however, they were protective regarding hospital readmissions (HR 0.75; 95% CI: 0.67–0.84; p‹0.001) and ED visits (HR 0.61; 95% CI: 0.53–0.69; p‹0.001). Conclusions HL and nursing complexity were predictors across several outcomes, while nursing interventions reduced hospital readmissions and ED visits. These results could be used to promote personalized nursing care covering strategies to address inadequate HL in atrial fibrillation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.435 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal SupplementsSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207