Quality of health literacy instruments used in children and adolescents: a systematic review.
Quality of health literacy instruments used in children and adolescents: a systematic review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020080
复制
发表时间：
2018-06-14
期刊：
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Yu X
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Guo S;Armstrong R;Waters E;Sathish T;Alif SM;Browne GR;Yu X
从小提高健康素养对于个人健康和发展至关重要。尽管儿童和青少年的健康素养在过去十年中取得了增长势头，但它仍然是一个研究不足的领域，特别是健康素养测量。本研究旨在检查儿童和青少年使用的健康素养工具的质量，并确定现场使用的最佳工具。系统审查。广泛的环境，包括学校、诊所和社区。 6-24 岁的儿童和/或青少年。健康素养工具的测量属性（可靠性、有效性和响应性）和其他重要特征（例如健康主题、组成部分或评分系统）。筛选过程中确定了 29 个健康素养工具。在衡量儿童和青少年的健康素养时，研究人员主要关注功能领域（阅读和写作的基本技能），并考虑参与者的发展变化特征（认知能力）、依赖性（对父母）和人口模式（例如种族/民族背景），较少关注差异流行病学（健康和疾病）。通过测量属性评估的纳入研究的方法学质量从差到优不等。由于纳入研究的方法学质量较差或缺乏报告或评估，超过一半（62.9%）的测量属性未知。 8 项健康素养评估工具 (HLAT-8) 显示了构建有效性的最佳证据，青少年健康素养测量显示了可靠性的最佳证据。需要更严格和高质量的研究来填补健康素养工具测量特性的知识空白。尽管就哪种工具最可靠和最有效得出强有力的结论具有挑战性，但本次综述提供了重要的证据，支持在未来的学校研究中使用 HLAT-8 来衡量儿童和青少年的健康素养。
Improving health literacy at an early age is crucial to personal health and development. Although health literacy in children and adolescents has gained momentum in the past decade, it remains an under-researched area, particularly health literacy measurement. This study aimed to examine the quality of health literacy instruments used in children and adolescents and to identify the best instrument for field use. Systematic review. A wide range of settings including schools, clinics and communities. Children and/or adolescents aged 6–24 years. Measurement properties (reliability, validity and responsiveness) and other important characteristics (eg, health topics, components or scoring systems) of health literacy instruments. There were 29 health literacy instruments identified from the screening process. When measuring health literacy in children and adolescents, researchers mainly focus on the functional domain (basic skills in reading and writing) and consider participant characteristics of developmental change (of cognitive ability), dependency (on parents) and demographic patterns (eg, racial/ethnic backgrounds), less on differential epidemiology (of health and illness). The methodological quality of included studies as assessed via measurement properties varied from poor to excellent. More than half (62.9%) of measurement properties were unknown, due to either poor methodological quality of included studies or a lack of reporting or assessment. The 8-item Health Literacy Assessment Tool (HLAT-8) showed best evidence on construct validity, and the Health Literacy Measure for Adolescents showed best evidence on reliability. More rigorous and high-quality studies are needed to fill the knowledge gap in measurement properties of health literacy instruments. Although it is challenging to draw a robust conclusion about which instrument is the most reliable and the most valid, this review provides important evidence that supports the use of the HLAT-8 to measure childhood and adolescent health literacy in future school-based research.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Bowling, A
通讯作者：
Bowling, A
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Chang, Li-Chun;Hsieh, Pei-Lin;Liu, Chieh-Hsing
通讯作者：
Liu, Chieh-Hsing
影响因子：
1
作者：
Hubbard, Betty;Rainey, Jacquie
通讯作者：
Rainey, Jacquie
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Ghanbari S;Ramezankhani A;Montazeri A;Mehrabi Y
通讯作者：
Mehrabi Y
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Abel, Thomas;Hofmann, Karen;Sakarya, Sibel
通讯作者：
Sakarya, Sibel