ArticleJMIR human factors2025
Creation of Text Vignettes Based on Patient-Reported Data to Facilitate a Better Understanding of the Patient Perspective: Design Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Health Literacy and Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Mixed Method Study.Health literacy research and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcome (PRO) data refer to information systematically reported by patients, or on behalf of patients, without the influence of health care professionals. It is a focal point of the health care system's ambition toward becoming more involving and personalized. It is recognized that PROs provide valuable data. However, despite this recognition, there are challenges related to both patients' and clinicians' accurate interpretations of the quantitative data. To overcome these challenges, this study explores text vignettes as a representation of PROs.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop data-informed text vignettes based on data from the Readiness and Enablement Index for Health Technology (READHY) instrument as another way of representing PRO data and to examine how these are perceived as understandable and relevant for both patients and clinicians.
methodsThe text vignettes were created from participant responses to the READHY instrument, which encompasses health literacy, health education, and eHealth literacy. The text vignettes were created from 13 individual text strings, each corresponding to a scale in the READHY instrument. This study consisted of 3 sequential parts. In part 1, individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease completed the READHY instrument, providing data to be used to create vignettes based on cluster profiles from the READHY instrument. Part 2 focused on the development of scale-based strings representing all READHY dimensions, which were evaluated through iterative cognitive interviews. In part 3, clinicians and patients assessed the understanding and relevance of the text vignettes.
resultsClinicians and patients both understood and related to the text vignettes. Patients viewed the text vignettes as an accurate reflection of their PRO responses, and clinicians perceived the text vignettes as aligned with their understanding of patients' experiences.
conclusionsText vignettes can be developed using PRO instruments, with individual scales as input strings. This provides an opportunity to present numeric values in a text format that is understandable and recognizable to most patients and clinicians. Challenges with the vignette's language and layout require customization and clinician training to ensure meaningful interpretation. Findings also support the need to expand the study and enhance clinical relevance with alternative or contextually relevant text vignettes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.