Examination of the theses published in family medicine related to health literacy with social network analysis

Year 2022, , 54 - 59, 29.04.2022

Gökhan Ocakoğlu

https://doi.org/10.46310/tjim.1018451

Abstract

Background: In recent years, it has been seen that the concept of health literacy has an increasing interest in academic studies and theses published in Turkey. Within the scope of the study, the theses written on health literacy in the field of family medicine were evaluated. It was aimed to reveal the thematic development and knowledge structure of the theses published in this field.
Material and Methods: Within the scope of this study, social network analysis was carried out based on the keywords obtained from the theses prepared with the target of health literacy. Theses included in the study were accessed via https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/. The studies that include the phrase “health literacy” in the title were selected in the examination scope, and the keywords obtained from these theses were listed.
Results: It is observed that the concept with the highest degree of centrality and betweenness centrality is “health literacy,” as expected. Following the keyword “health literacy,” the keywords “life quality,” “mortality,” “family medicine,” “vaccine,” and “diabetes mellitus” have the highest degree of centrality, respectively. It is observed that the betweenness centrality values of the “newest vital sign” and “life quality” keywords are quite high compared to the degree centrality values.
Conclusions: Through this study, researchers can focus on issues that are not emphasized much, create original research questions and contribute to the literature. In addition, it may be important to reveal which concepts are associated with the concept of health literacy through this study.

Keywords

Family medicine, health literacy, social network analysis, degree centrality, betweenness centrality

References

• WHO T. Health literacy and health behaviour. in 7th Global Conference on Health Promotion: track themes. Accessed at http://www. who. int/healthpromotion/conferences/7gchp/ tra ck2/en/(on 10.01. 2017). 2015.
• Consortium E H L S. Comparative report of health literacy in eight EU member states. 2012; Available from: Retrieved from Harvard University website:https://cdn1.sph.harvard. edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/135/2015/09/neu_rev_hls-eu_ report_2015_05_13_lit.pdf.
• Akbal E, Gokler ME. COVID-19 salgını sürecinde eksikliği ortaya çıkan bir gerçek: Sağlık okuryazarlığı. ESTÜDAM Halk Sağlığı Dergisi. 2020;5:148-55 (in Turkish). doi: 10.35232/ estudamhsd.763717.
• Özdemir S, Hatice A Türkiye’de sağlık okuryazarlığı. SDÜ Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi. 2021;28:535-6 (in Turkish). doi: 10.17343/ sdutfd.791741.
• Sorensen RM, Jovanović B. From nanoplastic to microplastic: A bibliometric analysis on the presence of plastic particles in the environment. Mar Pollut Bull. 2021 Feb;163:111926. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111926. E
• Broadus RN. Toward a definition of “bibliometrics”. Scientometrics. 1987;12:373-9. doi: 10.1007/Bf02016680.
• Jang H, An JY. Social Network Analysis of Elders’ Health Literacy and their Use of Online Health Information. Healthc Inform Res. 2014 Jul;20(3):216-25. doi: 10.4258/ hir.2014.20.3.216.
• Wasserman S, Faust K. Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press; 1994.
• Sohn D. Social network analysis. Korea: Kyungmun Publisher. Seoul, Korea: Kyungmun Publisher; 2010:1-21.
• BorgattiSP,EverettMG,FreemanLC.UcinetforWindows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic technologies; 2002:6.
• Balçık PY, Taşkaya S, Şahin B. Sağlık okur-yazarlığı. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin. 2014;13(4):321-6 (in Turkish). doi: 10.5455/pmb1-1402386162.
• Nutbeam D. Health promotion glossary. Health Promot Int. 1998;13(4):349-64.
• Kutner M, Greenburg E, Jin Y, Paulsen C. The Health Literacy of America’s Adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. NCES 2006-483. National Center for Education Statistics. 2006.
• Sørensen K, Van den Broucke S, Fullam J, Doyle G, Pelikan J, Slonska Z, Brand H; (HLS-EU) Consortium Health Literacy Project European. Health literacy and public health: a systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC Public Health. 2012 Jan 25;12:80. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458- 12-80.
• Berkman ND, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE, Halpern DJ, Crotty K. Low health literacy and health outcomes: an updated systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Jul 19;155(2):97-107. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-2-201107190-00005.
• Wang HM, Beyer M, Gensichen J, Gerlach FM. Health-related quality of life among general practice patients with differing chronic diseases in Germany: cross sectional survey. BMC Public Health. 2008 Jul 21;8:246. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-8-246.
• ZhengM,JinH,ShiN,DuanC,WangD,YuX,LiX.The relationship between health literacy and quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018 Oct 16;16(1):201. doi: 10.1186/s12955-018-1031- 7.
• Song S, Lee SM, Jang S, Lee YJ, Kim NH, Sohn HR, Suh DC. Mediation effects of medication information processing and adherence on association between health literacy and quality of life. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Sep 16;17(1):661. doi: 10.1186/ s12913-017-2598-0.
• Fan ZY, Yang Y, Zhang F. Association between health literacy and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Public Health. 2021 Jul 1;79(1):119. doi: 10.1186/s13690-021- 00648-7.