MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414579168 · doi:10.3171/2025.5.peds25172

Role of health literacy in neurosurgical outcomes among pediatric and adult patients: a systematic review of international studies and call to action

2025· article· en· W4414579168 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria Isabel Barros Guinle, Ella A Nettnin, Laura M. Prolo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Pediatrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCall to actionAction (physics)Health literacyMEDLINESystematic reviewInternational studiesLiteracy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Limited health literacy (HL) is associated with worse clinical outcomes across medical specialties. The association between limited HL and neurosurgical outcomes remains largely unknown. In this systematic review, the authors synthesized the existing literature on the association between limited patient and/or caregiver HL and neurosurgical outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and JBI EBP from inception to February 12, 2025, following PRISMA guidelines. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The study design, sample size, population of interest, neurosurgical diagnoses/procedures, HL assessment used, pertinent findings, and related demographic factors were collected. RESULTS: The search yielded 698 article titles and abstracts, of which 37 underwent full-text review and 6 met inclusion criteria for this systematic review. These 6 studies included 695 neurosurgical patients and/or caregivers and used various methods to assess HL. Neurosurgical outcomes were grouped into the following categories: 1) delivery and timing of neurosurgical care, 2) hospital admission and discharge, and 3) quality of life (QOL) and well-being. Study results were split evenly across these 3 categories, with 2 studies that explored the delivery and timing of neurosurgical care, 2 that examined hospital admission and discharge, and 2 that investigated QOL and well-being. Study designs included 2 prospective observational studies, 3 cross-sectional studies, and 1 qualitative study. Sample sizes ranged from 27 to 300 patients, including pediatric, adult, and mixed (pediatric and adult) populations, as well as caregivers of pediatric and adult patients. All 6 studies were conducted outside the United States. Limited HL was found to be associated with delays in neurosurgical care, increased rates of discharge against medical advice, decreased patient independence, and worse psychological well-being. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the paucity of studies on neurosurgical outcomes among patients and/or caregivers with limited HL, while suggesting that limited HL is associated with worse neurosurgical outcomes. In addition, the lack of studies conducted in the US indicates a geographic gap in the literature. The authors provide a call to action and concrete steps to address the critical need for further research on HL to achieve more equitable neurosurgical care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.008
Bibliometrics0.0120.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.405 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurosurgery PediatricsSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207