Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26163383›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2015

Assessment of the Chinese Resident Health Literacy Scale in a population-based sample in South China.

Minxue Shen, Ming Hu, Siyun Liu, Yan Chang, Zhenqiu Sun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Nutrition Literacy and Dietary Behavior Among Malaysian Adults.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Developing a Health Literacy Scale for adults in Hong Kong: A modified e-Delphi study with healthcare consumers and providers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Minxue ShenDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Central South University, 110 Xiangya Road, Changsha, 410078, Hunan, China. shenmx1988@gmail.com.
Ming HuDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Central South University, 110 Xiangya Road, Changsha, 410078, Hunan, China. huming0129@126.com.
Siyun LiuDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Central South University, 110 Xiangya Road, Changsha, 410078, Hunan, China. cherrylsyxzy@sina.com.
Yan ChangDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Central South University, 110 Xiangya Road, Changsha, 410078, Hunan, China. 15570864730@163.com.
Zhenqiu SunDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Central South University, 110 Xiangya Road, Changsha, 410078, Hunan, China. szq@xysm.net.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA national health literacy scale was developed in China in 2012, though no studies have validated it. In this investigation, we assessed the reliability, construct validity, and measurement invariance of that scale.

methodsA population-based sample of 3731 participants in Hunan Province was used to validate the Chinese Resident Health Literacy Scale based on item response theory and classical test theory (including split-half coefficient, Cronbach's alpha, and confirmatory factor analysis). Measurement invariance was examined by differential item functioning.

resultsThe overall Cronbach's alpha of the scale was 0.95 and Spearman-Brown coefficient 0.94. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the test measured a unidimensional construct with three highly correlated factors. Highest discrimination was found among participants with limited to moderate health literacy. In all, 64 items were selected from the original scale based on factor loading, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and discrimination and difficulty parameters in item response theory. Measurement invariance was significant but slight. According to the two-level linear model, health literacy was associated with education level, occupation, and income.

conclusionsThe 2012 national health literacy scale was validated, and 64 items were selected based on classical test theory and item response theory. The revised version of the scale has strong psychometric properties with minor measurement invariance.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAge DistributionChinaFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26163383
PMCPMC4498512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.