Download
journal.pone.0268789.pdf 1,38MB
WeightNameValue
1000 Titel
  • Plain language summaries: A systematic review of theory, guidelines and empirical research
1000 Autor/in
  1. Stoll, Marlene |
  2. Kerwer, Martin |
  3. Lieb, Klaus |
  4. Chasiotis, Anita |
1000 Erscheinungsjahr 2022
1000 LeibnizOpen
1000 Publikationstyp
  1. Artikel |
1000 Online veröffentlicht
  • 2022-06-06
1000 Erschienen in
1000 Quellenangabe
  • 17(6):e026878
1000 FRL-Sammlung
1000 Copyrightjahr
  • 2022
1000 Lizenz
1000 Verlagsversion
  • https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268789 |
  • https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9170105/ |
1000 Ergänzendes Material
  • https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268789#sec026 |
1000 Publikationsstatus
1000 Begutachtungsstatus
1000 Sprache der Publikation
1000 Abstract/Summary
  • Plain language summaries (PLSs) have been introduced to communicate research in an understandable way to a nonexpert audience. Guidelines for writing PLSs have been developed and empirical research on PLSs has been conducted, but terminology and research approaches in this comparatively young field vary considerably. This prompted us to review the current state of the art of the theoretical and empirical literature on PLSs. The two main objectives of this review were to develop a conceptual framework for PLS theory, and to synthesize empirical evidence on PLS criteria. We began by searching Web of Science, PubMed, PsycInfo and PSYNDEX (last search 07/2021). In our review, we included empirical investigations of PLSs, reports on PLS development, PLS guidelines, and theoretical articles referring to PLSs. A conceptual framework was developed through content analysis. Empirical studies investigating effects of PLS criteria on defined outcomes were narratively synthesized. We identified 7,714 records, of which 90 articles met the inclusion criteria. All articles were used to develop a conceptual framework for PLSs which comprises 12 categories: six of PLS aims and six of PLS characteristics. Thirty-three articles empirically investigated effects of PLSs on several outcomes, but study designs were too heterogeneous to identify definite criteria for high-quality PLSs. Few studies identified effects of various criteria on accessibility, understanding, knowledge, communication of research, and empowerment. We did not find empirical evidence to support most of the criteria we identified in the PLS writing guidelines. We conclude that although considerable work on establishing and investigating PLSs is available, empirical evidence on criteria for high-quality PLSs remains scarce. The conceptual framework developed in this review may provide a valuable starting point for future guideline developers and PLS researchers.
1000 Sacherschließung
lokal Scientific publishing
lokal Decision making
lokal Medical risk factors
lokal Health education and awareness
lokal Systematic reviews
lokal Metaanalysis
lokal Language
lokal Research quality assessment
1000 Fächerklassifikation (DDC)
1000 Liste der Beteiligten
  1. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8847-5497|https://frl.publisso.de/adhoc/uri/S2Vyd2VyLCBNYXJ0aW4=|https://frl.publisso.de/adhoc/uri/TGllYiwgS2xhdXM=|https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4103-5018
1000 Label
1000 Fördernummer
  1. -
1000 Förderprogramm
  1. -
1000 Dateien
1000 Objektart article
1000 Beschrieben durch
1000 @id frl:6440596.rdf
1000 Erstellt am 2023-03-08T11:10:13.118+0100
1000 Erstellt von 317
1000 beschreibt frl:6440596
1000 Bearbeitet von 317
1000 Zuletzt bearbeitet 2023-03-08T11:12:15.756+0100
1000 Objekt bearb. Wed Mar 08 11:11:04 CET 2023
1000 Vgl. frl:6440596
1000 Oai Id
  1. oai:frl.publisso.de:frl:6440596 |
1000 Sichtbarkeit Metadaten public
1000 Sichtbarkeit Daten public
1000 Gegenstand von

View source