A Canadian exploratory study to define a measure of health literacy
A Canadian exploratory study to define a measure of health literacy
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/heapro/dar015
复制
发表时间：
2012-03-01
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
Kwan, Brenda
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Begoray, Deborah Leslie;Kwan, Brenda
本研究进行了定性探索的操作定义的健康素养和健康素养技能的定量措施的检查。我们采访了229名加拿大老年人。首先，我们让他们参与一个开放式的讨论，讨论他们如何寻找一个自选的健康主题的信息。接下来，我们管理了9个关于健康素养技能的自我报告项目，然后是任务绩效项目。任务表现问题是基于两个已发表的阅读文章的五个难度水平，以衡量对健康相关材料的理解。成人医学素养快速评估（REALM）也被管理作为标准相关效度的比较。我们的开放式问题引发了人们在试图获取、理解、评价和交流健康信息时所经历的过程。定性研究结果揭示了参与者对所有四种健康素养技能含义的解释的复杂性。这些描述性的发现增加了关于健康素养的新知识。参与者同意大多数自我报告的陈述，从而表明他们对自己的健康素养的高度信任。REALM评分范围为45至66，平均值为65，标准差为2.5。阅读段落的定量分数与REALM分数适度相关。然而，自我报告项目的总和与任务绩效项目不相关，这表明不同类型的项目可能不测量相同的结构。我们认为，自我报告项目需要更多的发展和验证。我们的研究在探索测量健康素养技能的复杂性，一般健康环境的贡献。
This study undertook a qualitative exploration of an operational definition of health literacy and an examination of quantitative measures of health literacy skills. We interviewed 229 older Canadian adults. First we engaged them in open-ended discussions about their search for information on a self-selected health topic. Next we administered nine self-report items on health literacy skills, and then task-performance items. Task-performance questions were based on two published reading passages on five levels of difficulty to measure ounderstanding' of health-related material. The Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM) was also administered as the comparison for criterion-related validity. Our open-ended questions elicited responses about the processes that people undergo when they attempt to access, understand, appraise and communicate health information. Qualitative findings revealed complexities in participants' interpretation of the meaning of all four health literacy skills. These descriptive findings add new knowledge about health literacy as a construct. Participants agreed with most of the self-report statements, thus indicating high belief in their own health literacy. REALM scores ranged from 45 to 66 with an average of 65 and standard deviation of 2.5. Quantitative scores on the reading passages were modestly correlated with scores on the REALM. The sum scale of self-report items, however, did not correlate with task-performance items, suggesting that the different types of items may not be measuring the same construct. We suggest that self-report items need more development and validation. Our study makes a contribution in exploring the complexities of measuring health literacy skills for general health contexts.