Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorvan Beusekom, Mara M.
dc.contributor.authorGrootens-Wiegers, Petronella
dc.contributor.authorBos, Mark J. W.
dc.contributor.authorGuchelaar, Henk-Jan
dc.contributor.authorvan den Broek, Jos M.
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-11T10:30:03Z
dc.date.available2019-07-11T10:30:03Z
dc.date.issued2016-12
dc.identifier.citationvan Beusekom , M M , Grootens-Wiegers , P , Bos , M J W , Guchelaar , H-J & van den Broek , J M 2016 , ' Low literacy and written drug information : information-seeking, leaflet evaluation and preferences, and roles for images ' , International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy , vol. 38 , no. 6 , pp. 1372-1379 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-016-0376-4en
dc.identifier.issn2210-7703
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 259562655
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: fe75cc32-5f4e-4f21-8410-04553ae68697
dc.identifier.otherPubMed: 27655308
dc.identifier.otherPubMedCentral: PMC5124048
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 84988659878
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-4536-0558/work/59464966
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/18079
dc.description.abstractBackground Low-literate patients are at risk to misinterpret written drug information. For the (co-) design of targeted patient information, it is key to involve this group in determining their communication barriers and information needs. Objective To gain insight into how people with low literacy use and evaluate written drug information, and to identify ways in which they feel the patient leaflet can be improved, and in particular how images could be used. Setting Food banks and an education institution for Dutch language training in the Netherlands. Method Semi-structured focus groups and individual interviews were held with low-literate participants (n = 45). The thematic framework approach was used for analysis to identify themes in the data. Main outcome measure Low-literate people’s experience with patient information leaflets, ideas for improvements, and perceptions on possible uses for visuals. Results Patient information leaflets were considered discouraging to use, and information difficult to find and understand. Many rely on alternative information sources. The leaflet should be shorter, and improved in terms of organisation, legibility and readability. Participants thought images could increase the leaflet’s appeal, help ask questions, provide an overview, help understand textual information, aid recall, reassure, and even lead to increased confidence, empowerment and feeling of safety. Conclusion Already at the stages of paying attention to the leaflet and maintaining interest in the message, low-literate patients experience barriers in the communication process through written drug information. Short, structured, visual/textual explanations can lower the motivational threshold to use the leaflet, improve understanding, and empower the low-literate target group.
dc.format.extent8
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Clinical Pharmacyen
dc.rightsCopyright The Author(s) 2016. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distri-bution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were madeen
dc.subjectDrug informationen
dc.subjectLiteracyen
dc.subjectLegibilityen
dc.subjectNetherlandsen
dc.subjectPatient information leafleten
dc.subjectPictogramsen
dc.subjectReadabilityen
dc.subjectVisualsen
dc.subjectRA Public aspects of medicineen
dc.subjectRM Therapeutics. Pharmacologyen
dc.subjectNDASen
dc.subjectBDCen
dc.subjectR2Cen
dc.subjectSDG 1 - No Povertyen
dc.subject.lccRAen
dc.subject.lccRMen
dc.titleLow literacy and written drug information : information-seeking, leaflet evaluation and preferences, and roles for imagesen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPublisher PDFen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Medicineen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-016-0376-4
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record