Yoxas/statistical_literacy huggingface dataset:
Shared decision-making (SDM) has been found to be significantly and positively associated with improved patient outcomes. For an SDM process to occur, patients require functional, communicative, and critical health literacy (HL) skills. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a program to improve health literacy skills for SDM in adults with lower literacy. An HL program including an SDM component (HL + SDM) and teaching of the three "AskShareKnow" questions was delivered in adult basic education settings in New South Wales, Australia. The program was evaluated using a partially cluster-randomized controlled trial comparing it to standard language, literacy, and numeracy (LLN) training. We measured the effect of these programs on (1) HL skills for SDM (conceptual knowledge, graphical literacy, health numeracy), (2) types of questions considered important for health decision-making, (3) preferences for control in decision-making, and (4) decisional conflict. We also measured AskShareKnow question recall, use, and evaluation in HL + SDM participants. There were 308 participants from 28 classes enrolled in the study. Most participants had limited functional HL (71%) and spoke a language other than English at home (60%). In the primary analysis, the HL + SDM program compared with the standard LLN program significantly increased conceptual knowledge (19.1% difference between groups in students achieving the competence threshold; p = .018) and health numeracy (10.9% difference; p = .032), but not graphical literacy (5.8% difference; p = .896). HL + SDM participants were significantly more likely to consider it important to ask questions that would enable SDM compared to standard LLN participants who prioritized nonmedical procedural questions (all p < .01). There was no difference in preferences for control in decision-making or in decisional conflict. Among HL + SDM participants, 79% (n = 85) correctly recalled at least one of the AskShareKnow questions immediately post-intervention, and 35% (n = 29) after 6 months. Teaching SDM content increased participants' HL skills for SDM and changed the nature of the questions they would ask health care professionals in a way that would enable shared health decisions. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2019;3(Suppl.):S58-S74.]. We developed a health literacy program that included a shared decision-making (SDM) section. The program was delivered in adult basic education classes by trained educators and compared to standard language, literacy, and numeracy training. Teaching SDM content increased participants' health literacy skills for SDM and changed the nature of the questions they would ask health care professionals.
Shared decision-making (SDM) incorporates patient values and preferences to optimize asthma management decisions. Available asthma SDM aids primarily focus on medication selection. To assess the usability, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of an electronic SDM application, the ACTION (Active Conversation in asthma Treatment shared decisION-making) app, that addressed medication, nonmedication, and COVID-19 concerns for asthma. In this pilot study, 81 participants with asthma were randomized into the control arm or ACTION app intervention. The ACTION app was completed 1 week before a clinic visit, and responses were shared with the medical provider. The primary outcomes were patient satisfaction and SDM quality. Next, ACTION app users (n = 9) and providers (n = 5) provided feedback through separate virtual focus groups. Sessions were coded by comparative analysis. The ACTION app group scored higher agreement that providers adequately addressed COVID-19 concerns compared with the control group (4.4 vs 3.7, P = .03). Although the ACTION app group had a higher total 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire score, this did not reach statistical significance (87.1 vs 83.3, P = .2). However, the ACTION app group demonstrated stronger agreement that their physician knew exactly how they wanted to be involved in decision-making (4.3 vs 3.8, P = .05), providers asked about preferences (4.3 vs 3.8, P = .05), and that different options were thoroughly weighed (4.3 vs 3.8, P = .03). Major focus group themes included that the ACTION app was practical and established a patient-centered agenda. An electronic asthma SDM app that incorporates patient preferences regarding nonmedication-related, medication-related, and COVID-19-related concerns is well accepted and can improve patient satisfaction and SDM.
Shared decision-making (SDM) is an integral part of patient-centered delivery of care. Maximizing the opportunity of patients to participate in decisions related to their health is an expectation in care delivery nowadays. The purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions of physicians in regard to SDM in a large private hospital network in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. This study utilized a cross-sectional design, where a survey questionnaire was assembled to capture quantitative and qualitative data on the perception of physicians in relation to SDM. The survey instrument included three sections: the first solicited physicians' personal and professional information, the second entailed a 9-item SDM Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9), and the third included an open-ended section. Statistical analysis assessed whether the average SDM-Q-9 score differed significantly by gender, age, years of experience, professional status-generalist versus specialist, and work location-hospitals versus polyclinics. Non-parametric analysis (two independent variables) with the Mann-Whitney test was utilized. The qualitative data was thematically analyzed. Fifty physicians from various specialties participated in this study (25 of each gender-85% response rate). Although the quantitative data analysis revealed that most physicians (80%) rated themselves quite highly when it comes to SDM, qualitative analysis underscored a number of barriers that limited the opportunity for SDM. Analysis identified four themes that influence the acceptability of SDM, namely physician-specific (where the physicians' extent of adopting SDM is related to their own belief system and their perception that the presence of evidence negates the need for SDM), patient-related (e.g., patients' unwillingness to be involved in decisions concerning their health), contextual/environmental (e.g., sociocultural impediments), and relational (the information asymmetry and the power gradient that influence how the physician and patient relate to one another). SDM and evidence-based management (EBM) are not mutually exclusive. Professional learning and development programs targeting caregivers should focus on the consolidation of the two perspectives. We encourage healthcare managers and leaders to translate declared policies into actionable initiatives supporting patient-centered care. This could be achieved through the dedication of the necessary resources that would enable SDM, and the development of interventions that are designed both to improve health literacy and to educate patients on their rights.
Shared decision-making is recommended for patients considering treatment options for severe aortic stenosis (AS) and chronic coronary artery disease (CAD). This review aims to systematically identify and assess patient decision aids (PtDAs) for chronic CAD and AS and evaluate the international evidence on their effectiveness for improving the quality of decision-making. Five databases (Cochrane, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycInfo), clinical trial registers and 30 PtDA repositories/websites were searched from 2006 to March 2023. Screening, data extraction and quality assessments were completed independently by multiple reviewers. Meta-analyses were conducted using Stata statistical software. Eleven AS and 10 CAD PtDAs were identified; seven were less than five years old. Over half the PtDAs were web-based and the remainder paper-based. One AS and two CAD PtDAs fully/partially achieved international PtDA quality criteria. Ten studies were included in the review; four reported on the development/evaluation of AS PtDAs and six on CAD PtDAs. Most studies were conducted in the USA with White, well-educated, English-speaking participants. No studies fulfilled all quality criteria for reporting PtDA development and evaluation. Meta-analyses found that PtDAs significantly increased patient knowledge compared to 'usual care' (mean difference:0.620; 95%CI 0.396, 0.845, p < 0.001) but did not change decisional conflict. Patients who use PtDAs when considering treatments for AS or chronic CAD are likely to be better informed than those who do not. Existing PtDAs may not meet the needs of people with low health literacy levels as they are rarely involved in their development.
Shared decision-making is the preferred method for evaluating complex tradeoffs in the care of patients with critical illness. However, it remains unknown whether critical care clinicians engage diverse patients and caregivers equitably in shared decision-making. To compare critical care clinicians' approaches to shared decision-making in recorded conversations with Black and White caregivers of patients with critical illness. This thematic analysis consisted of unstructured clinician-caregiver meetings audio-recorded during a randomized clinical trial of a decision aid about prolonged mechanical ventilation at 13 intensive care units in the US. Participants in meetings included critical care clinicians and Black or White caregivers of patients who underwent mechanical ventilation. The codebook included components of shared decision-making and known mechanisms of racial disparities in clinical communication. Analysts were blinded to caregiver race during coding. Patterns within and across racial groups were evaluated to identify themes. Data analysis was conducted between August 2021 and April 2023. The main outcomes were themes describing clinician behaviors varying by self-reported race of the caregivers. The overall sample comprised 20 Black and 19 White caregivers for a total of 39 audio-recorded meetings with clinicians. The duration of meetings was similar for both Black and White caregivers (mean [SD], 23.9 [13.7] minutes vs 22.1 [11.2] minutes, respectively). Both Black and White caregivers were generally middle-aged (mean [SD] age, 47.6 [9.9] years vs 51.9 [8.8] years, respectively), female (15 [75.0%] vs 14 [73.7%], respectively), and possessed a high level of self-assessed health literacy, which was scored from 3 to 15 with lower scores indicating increasing health literacy (mean [SD], 5.8 [2.3] vs 5.3 [2.0], respectively). Clinicians conducting meetings with Black and White caregivers were generally young (mean [SD] age, 38.8 [6.6] years vs 37.9 [8.2] years, respectively), male (13 [72.2%] vs 12 [70.6%], respectively), and White (14 [77.8%] vs 17 [100%], respectively). Four variations in clinicians' shared decision-making behaviors by caregiver race were identified: (1) providing limited emotional support for Black caregivers, (2) failing to acknowledge trust and gratitude expressed by Black caregivers, (3) sharing limited medical information with Black caregivers, and (4) challenging Black caregivers' preferences for restorative care. These themes encompass both relational and informational aspects of shared decision-making. The results of this thematic analysis showed that critical care clinicians missed opportunities to acknowledge emotions and value the knowledge of Black caregivers compared with White caregivers. These findings may inform future clinician-level interventions aimed at promoting equitable shared decision-making.
Shared treatment decision making in a cancer setting requires a patient's understanding of the potential benefits and risks of each treatment option. Graphical display of risk information is one approach to improving understanding. Little is known about how patients engage with infographics in the context of health education materials and whether interactions vary with health literacy levels. We conducted an observational study, using an eye tracker device, of how men with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer visually engaged with an on-screen infographic depicting risk information in the Personal Patient Profile-Prostate. Health literacy was measured with the Short Assessment of Health Literacy-English. Gaze patterns on an exemplar screens containing infographics about survival were analyzed and explored with respect to sociodemographic and health literacy data. Acceptability of Personal Patient Profile-Prostate was measured with the Acceptability E-scale. Twenty-six English-speaking men participated, and eye tracking data were collected for 12 men on the exemplar page of risk information that we analyzed. We found preliminary evidence of visual scanning and of participants with lower literacy focusing sooner on infographics versus text. Acceptability for Personal Patient Profile-Prostate was high. These findings suggest that infographics may be of higher relative value to participants with low health literacy. Eye trackers may provide valuable information on how people visually engage with infographics and may inform development of health education materials, although care must be taken to minimize data loss.
Sharing electronic health records with patients has been shown to improve patient safety and quality of care. Patient portals represent a convenient tool to enhance patient access to their own health care data. However, the success of portals will only be possible through sustained adoption by its end users: the patients. A better understanding of the characteristics of users and nonusers is critical for understanding which groups remain excluded from using such tools. This study aims to identify the determinants of the use of the Care Information Exchange, a shared patient portal program in the United Kingdom. A cross-sectional study was conducted using a web-based questionnaire. Information collected included age, gender, ethnicity, educational level, health status, postcode, and digital literacy. Registered individuals were defined as having had an account created in the portal, independent of their actual use of the platform; users were defined as having ever used the portal. Multivariate logistic regression was used to model the probability of being a user. Statistical analysis was performed in R and Tableau was used to create maps of the proportion of Care Information Exchange users by postcode area. A total of 1083 participants replied to the survey (186% of the estimated minimum target sample). The proportion of users was 61.58% (667/1083). Among these, most (385/667, 57.7%) used the portal at least once a month. To characterize the system's users and nonusers, we performed a subanalysis of the sample, including only participants who had provided at least information regarding gender and age. The subanalysis included 650 individuals (389/650, 59.8% women; 551/650, 84.8% >40 years). Most participants were White (498/650, 76.6%) and resided in London (420/650, 64.6%). Individuals with a higher educational degree (undergraduate and professional, or postgraduate and higher) had higher odds of being a portal user (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.58, 95% CI 1.04-2.39 and OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.42-4.02, respectively) compared with those with a secondary degree or below. Higher digital literacy scores (≥30) were associated with higher odds of being a user (adjusted OR 2.96, 95% CI 2.02-4.35). Those with a good overall health status had lower odds of being a user (adjusted OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37-0.91). This work adds to the growing body of evidence highlighting the importance of educational aspects (educational level and digital literacy) in the adoption of patient portals. Further research should not only describe but also systematically address these inequalities through patient-centered interventions aimed at reducing the digital divide. Health care providers and policy makers must partner in investing and delivering strategic programs that improve access to technology and digital literacy in an effort to improve digital inclusion and reduce inequities in the delivery of care.
Shifting to a competency-based (CBME) and not time-bound curricular structure is challenging in the undergraduate medical education (UME) setting for a number of reasons. There are few examples of broad scale CBME-driven interventions that make the UME program less time-bound. However, given the range of student ability and varying speed of acquisition of competencies, this is an area in need of focus. This paper describes a model that uses the macro structure of a UME program to make UME curricula less time-bound, and driven more by student competency acquisition and individual student goals. The 3 + 1 curricular model was derived from the mission of the school, and includes a 3-year core curriculum that all students complete and an individualized phase. Students have an 18 month individualized educational program that meets their developmental needs and their educational and professional goals. This is achieved through a highly structured advising system, including the creation of an Individualized Learning Plan, driven by specific goals and targeted Entrustable Professional Activities (EPA). Students who struggle in achieving core competencies can use individualized time to support competency development and EPA acquisition. For students who have mastered core competencies, options include obtaining a masters degree, clinical immersion, research, and community-based experiences. Students can also graduate after the 3-year core curriculum, and enter residency one year early. Structural approaches such as this may contribute to the norming of the developmental nature of medical education, and can advance culture and systems that support CBME implementation at the UME level.
Short-term studies reported improved glycemic control and a decrease in eHbA1c (estimated hemoglobin A1c) in patients with type 1 diabetes during COVID-19 lockdown, but long-term changes are unknown. Therefore, the main objectives are to (1) analyze whether laboratory-measured HbA1c changed during and after two lockdowns and (2) investigate potential variables influencing HbA1c change. In this cohort study, 291 adults with type 1 diabetes were followed over 3 years including the prepandemic phase and two lockdowns. The data from medical records and validated questionnaires assessing health literacy (HLS-EU-Q16), diabetes self-management (DSMQ-R27), general self-efficacy (GSE), and social support (F-SOZU-K14) were used to analyze associations with HbA1c levels (N = 2370) by performing multivariable linear regressions. The median age was 54 (38-63) years and 159 (54.6%) were male. All phases of the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with a significant increase in laboratory-measured HbA1c levels in percent (e.g., during first lockdown β = 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07-0.39, p = 0.005; during the second lockdown, β = 0.27, 95% CI 0.15-0.38, p < 0.001). HbA1c change during lockdowns was significantly affected by the number of checkups (β = -0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to -0.01, p = 0.010), the value of HbA1c at previous observation (β = 0.33, 95% CI 0.29-0.36, p < 0.001), educational level (secondary versus tertiary: β = 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.38, p = 0.008; primary versus tertiary: β = 0.31, 95% CI 0.10-0.52, p = 0.004), health literacy score (for each point: β = -0.03, 95% CI -0.05 to - 0.002, p = 0.034), and diabetes self-management score (for each point: β = -0.03, 95% CI -0.04 to -0.02, p < 0.001). The use of continuous glucose monitoring or insulin pump had no effect on HbA1c change. Lockdowns can lead to worsening glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes. Particularly patients with few check-ups, poor blood glucose values, deficits in diabetes self-management, low health literacy, and a low level of education seem to be at greater risk of worsening glycemic control during lockdowns and, therefore, require special medical care, e.g., through telemedicine. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04821921.
Shortages in qualified supervision and other resources prevent education personnel from rehearsing effective practices. Interactive simulations, although increasingly used in education, frequently require instructor management. Automated simulations rarely engage trainees in skills related to practice (eg, speech). We evaluated the capability of delivering behavioral skills training through an automated virtual reality (VR) simulation using artificial intelligence to improve the implementation of a nondirective mathematical questioning strategy. We recruited and randomly assigned 30 college-aged participants to equivalent treatment (ie, lecture, modeling, and VR; 15/30, 50%) and control groups (ie, lecture and modeling only; 15/30, 50%). The participants were blind to treatment conditions. Sessions and assessments were conducted face to face and involved the use of VR for assessment regardless of the condition. Lessons concerned the use of a nondirective mathematical questioning strategy in instances where a simulated student provided correct or incorrect answers to word problems. The measures included observed and automated assessments of participant performance and subjective assessments of participant confidence. The participants completed the pretest, posttest, and maintenance probes each week over the course of 3 weeks. A mixed ANOVA revealed significant main effects of time (F2,27=124.154; P<.001; ηp2=0.816) and treatment (F1,28=19.281; P<.001; ηp2=0.408) as well as an interaction effect (F2,28=8.429; P<.001; ηp2=0.231) for the average percentage of steps in the questioning procedure. Posttest scores for the intervention group (mean 88%, SD 22.62%) exceeded those of the control group (mean 63.33%, SD 22.64%), with t28=3.653, P<.001, and Cohen d=1.334. Maintenance scores indicated a positive effect of the intervention (mean 83.33%, SD 24.40%) relative to the control (mean 54.67%, SD 15.98%), t28=3.807, P<.001, Cohen d=1.39. A Mann-Whitney U test indicated that the treatment groups' self-ratings of confidence (mean 2.41, SD 0.51) were higher than those of the control group (mean 2.04, SD 0.52), U=64, P=.04, r=0.137. The results demonstrate the potential of artificial intelligence-augmented VR to deliver effective, evidence-based training with limited instructor management. Additional work is needed to demonstrate the cascading effect of training on authentic practice and to encompass a wider range of skills.