↓ Skip to main content

Conceptualisation and development of the Conversational Health Literacy Assessment Tool (CHAT)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
31 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Conceptualisation and development of the Conversational Health Literacy Assessment Tool (CHAT)
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3037-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonathan O’Hara, Melanie Hawkins, Roy Batterham, Sarity Dodson, Richard H. Osborne, Alison Beauchamp

Abstract

The aim of this study was to develop a tool to support health workers' ability to identify patients' multidimensional health literacy strengths and challenges. The tool was intended to be suitable for administration in healthcare settings where health workers must identify health literacy priorities as the basis for person-centred care. Development was based on a qualitative co-design process that used the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ) as a framework to generate questions. Health workers were recruited to participate in an online consultation, a workshop, and two rounds of pilot testing. Participating health workers identified and refined ten questions that target five areas of assessment: supportive professional relationships, supportive personal relationships, health information access and comprehension, current health behaviours, and health promotion barriers and support. Preliminary evidence suggests that application of the Conversational Health Literacy Assessment Tool (CHAT) can support health workers to better understand the health literacy challenges and supportive resources of their patients. As an integrated clinical process, the CHAT can supplement existing intake and assessment procedures across healthcare settings to give insight into patients' circumstances so that decisions about care can be tailored to be more appropriate and effective.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Lecturer 4 7%
Other 15 26%
Unknown 8 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 23%
Social Sciences 7 12%
Computer Science 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 13 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 November 2019.
All research outputs
#1,146,034
of 15,922,434 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#434
of 5,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,919
of 281,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,922,434 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,494 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,439 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them