Applying Peplau's Interpersonal Relations Theory to Enhance Older Adults’ Health Literacy Through Nursing Care: A Theory Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the utility of Peplau's Interpersonal Relations Theory in enhancing health literacy among older adults in clinical nursing practice. With an aging global population, older adults increasingly require complex healthcare interactions. Effective communication between nurses and older adults, a central tenet of Peplau's theory, is critical for promoting health literacy and ensuring positive outcomes. Health literacy enables older adults to better navigate healthcare systems, manage chronic conditions, and engage in self-care. This theory analysis employs Walker and Avant's methodology to examine Peplau's theory in the context of enhancing older adults' health literacy. We provide a historical overview of the theory's origins, describe its meaning, and present a literature review of academic literature that explores the concept of nurses enhancing older adults' health literacy. Through a thematic synthesis of nine records retrieved from three databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO), this study identifies key themes such as trust-building, the role of social support, and nurses' roles as educators in facilitating health literacy. Findings support interpersonal nurse-patient relationships as critical to addressing health literacy barriers. The analysis highlights that Peplau's Interpersonal Relations Theory provides a useful framework for improving health literacy among older adults, ultimately supporting their well-being and healthcare outcomes.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".