{"title":"对机构卫生知识响应性评估工具进行系统的范围界定和内容分析。","authors":"Teresa Cheng-Chieh Chu, Rebecca K Kelly, Yih-Jin Hu, Shandell Elmer, Rosie Nash","doi":"10.1093/heapro/daae064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The characteristics of health literate organizations have been variously described in recognition that it is important for organizations to respond to the diversity of people's health literacy strengths and challenges. A systematic scoping review was conducted to identify, assess and classify international self-assessment tools aimed at measuring the capability of organizations to embody health literate characteristics. Following the JBI Scoping Manual, a search was conducted in six databases and identified 2693 articles. After screening, 16 studies published between 2007 and 2023 across eight countries were eligible for inclusion. Results were summarized and a finite list of items from existing tools was generated. Content analysis was performed to classify these items. Whilst most assessment tools in the included studies were healthcare-focused, other settings included schools and government departments. The 16 assessment tools included a total of 661 items, and 647 items were retained that met the definition of health literacy responsiveness. Items were classified into six domains (communication; navigation of resources; culture; policies and practice; involvement or engagement and workforce development), with high agreement between two researchers (91.5%). The 647 items were reviewed to exclude items that were too contextually specific, focused solely on service users, were too broad or had suitable alternatives; 210 items were finally retained. This research is two-fold: provides a synthesis of existing organizational health literacy responsiveness assessment tools across settings; and provides a list of items, which will be essential to developing context specific assessment tools through Delphi methods in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":54256,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion International","volume":"39 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic scoping review and content analysis of organizational health literacy responsiveness assessment tools.\",\"authors\":\"Teresa Cheng-Chieh Chu, Rebecca K Kelly, Yih-Jin Hu, Shandell Elmer, Rosie Nash\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/heapro/daae064\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The characteristics of health literate organizations have been variously described in recognition that it is important for organizations to respond to the diversity of people's health literacy strengths and challenges. A systematic scoping review was conducted to identify, assess and classify international self-assessment tools aimed at measuring the capability of organizations to embody health literate characteristics. Following the JBI Scoping Manual, a search was conducted in six databases and identified 2693 articles. After screening, 16 studies published between 2007 and 2023 across eight countries were eligible for inclusion. Results were summarized and a finite list of items from existing tools was generated. Content analysis was performed to classify these items. Whilst most assessment tools in the included studies were healthcare-focused, other settings included schools and government departments. The 16 assessment tools included a total of 661 items, and 647 items were retained that met the definition of health literacy responsiveness. Items were classified into six domains (communication; navigation of resources; culture; policies and practice; involvement or engagement and workforce development), with high agreement between two researchers (91.5%). The 647 items were reviewed to exclude items that were too contextually specific, focused solely on service users, were too broad or had suitable alternatives; 210 items were finally retained. This research is two-fold: provides a synthesis of existing organizational health literacy responsiveness assessment tools across settings; and provides a list of items, which will be essential to developing context specific assessment tools through Delphi methods in the future.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54256,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Promotion International\",\"volume\":\"39 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Promotion International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daae064\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daae064","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
A systematic scoping review and content analysis of organizational health literacy responsiveness assessment tools.
The characteristics of health literate organizations have been variously described in recognition that it is important for organizations to respond to the diversity of people's health literacy strengths and challenges. A systematic scoping review was conducted to identify, assess and classify international self-assessment tools aimed at measuring the capability of organizations to embody health literate characteristics. Following the JBI Scoping Manual, a search was conducted in six databases and identified 2693 articles. After screening, 16 studies published between 2007 and 2023 across eight countries were eligible for inclusion. Results were summarized and a finite list of items from existing tools was generated. Content analysis was performed to classify these items. Whilst most assessment tools in the included studies were healthcare-focused, other settings included schools and government departments. The 16 assessment tools included a total of 661 items, and 647 items were retained that met the definition of health literacy responsiveness. Items were classified into six domains (communication; navigation of resources; culture; policies and practice; involvement or engagement and workforce development), with high agreement between two researchers (91.5%). The 647 items were reviewed to exclude items that were too contextually specific, focused solely on service users, were too broad or had suitable alternatives; 210 items were finally retained. This research is two-fold: provides a synthesis of existing organizational health literacy responsiveness assessment tools across settings; and provides a list of items, which will be essential to developing context specific assessment tools through Delphi methods in the future.
期刊介绍:
Health Promotion International contains refereed original articles, reviews, and debate articles on major themes and innovations in the health promotion field. In line with the remits of the series of global conferences on health promotion the journal expressly invites contributions from sectors beyond health. These may include education, employment, government, the media, industry, environmental agencies, and community networks. As the thought journal of the international health promotion movement we seek in particular theoretical, methodological and activist advances to the field. Thus, the journal provides a unique focal point for articles of high quality that describe not only theories and concepts, research projects and policy formulation, but also planned and spontaneous activities, organizational change, as well as social and environmental development.