ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020
Psychometric Properties of the Norwegian Version of the Electronic Health Literacy Scale (eHEALS) Among Patients After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Cross-Sectional Validation Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03810612 (Continuity of Care, Adherence to Treatment and Self-reported Health After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention), which is not on this map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Continuity of Care, Adherence to Treatment and Self-reported Health After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (CONCARD): a Patient-centered Care Study
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of eHealth literacy in adult populations.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Measuring health literacy: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis of instruments from 1993 to 2021.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- eHealth Literacy Instruments: Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Development of the Happy Hands Self-Management App for People with Hand Osteoarthritis: Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Trial
- Measuring eHealth Literacy in the European Economic Area, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Association of Electronic Health Literacy With Self-Care and Health Outcomes Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Seeking But Not Discussing Online Health Information With Physicians: Cross-Sectional Survey Study of eHealth Literacy-Empowerment Profiles and Patient-Centered Communication.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Article
- Heterogeneity of eHealth literacy and treatment burden in older adults with heart failure: a multidimensional latent profile analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Relationship between digital health literacy and self-assessment of health among older adults in Xuzhou City: based on the mediating effect of health self-management.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Validation of the eHealth Literacy Scale Instrument in a Restless Legs Syndrome Population: Classical Test Theory and Rasch Analysis Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Parental health literacy in anorectal malformation: needs and challenges.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Article
- Psychometric Analysis of the eHealth Literacy Scale in Portuguese Older Adults (eHEALS-PT24): Instrument Development and Validation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Correlation analysis of electronic health literacy, compliance behavior, and quality of life in middle-aged and older patients with coronary heart disease: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Health literacy in parents of children with Hirschsprung disease: a novel study.Pediatric surgery international · 2024Article
- Measuring electronic health literacy in the context of diabetes care: psychometric evaluation of a Persian version of the condition-specific eHealth literacy scale for diabetes.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Assessing Electronic Health Literacy in Individuals With the Post-COVID-19 Condition Using the German Revised eHealth Literacy Scale: Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- eHealth literacy of migrant domestic workers in Hong Kong in the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed methods study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Assessment of the psychometric properties of the eHealth Literacy Scale for Brazilian adolescents.PloS one · 2024Article
- A web-based intervention for patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator - A qualitative study of nurses' experiences (Data from the ACQUIRE-ICD study).PEC innovation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWeb-based technology has recently become an important source for sharing health information with patients after an acute cardiac event. Therefore, consideration of patients' perceived electronic health (eHealth) literacy skills is crucial for improving the delivery of patient-centered health information.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to translate and adapt the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) to conditions in Norway, and to determine its psychometric properties. More specifically, we set out to determine the reliability (internal consistency, test-retest) and construct validity (structural validity, hypotheses testing, and cross-cultural validity) of the eHEALS in self-report format administered to patients after percutaneous coronary intervention.
methodsThe original English version of the eHEALS was translated into Norwegian following a widely used cross-cultural adaptation process. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach α. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the test-retest reliability. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed for a priori-specified 1-, 2-, and 3-factor models. Demographic, health-related internet use, health literacy, and health status information was collected to examine correlations with eHEALS scores.
resultsA total of 1695 patients after percutaneous coronary intervention were included in the validation analysis. The mean age was 66 years, and the majority of patients were men (1313, 77.46%). Cronbach α for the eHEALS was >.99. The corresponding Cronbach α for the 2-week retest was .94. The test-retest ICC for eHEALS was 0.605 (95% CI 0.419-0.743, P<.001). The CFA showed a modest model fit for the 1- and 2-factor models (root mean square error of approximation>0.06). After modifications in the 3-factor model, all of the goodness-of-fit indices indicated a good fit. There was a weak correlation with age (r=-0.206). Between-groups analysis of variance showed a difference according to educational groups and the eHEALS score, with a mean difference ranging from 2.24 (P=.002) to 4.61 (P<.001), and a higher eHEALS score was found for patients who were employed compared to those who were retired (mean difference 2.31, P<.001). The eHEALS score was also higher among patients who reported using the internet to find health information (95% CI -21.40 to -17.21, P<.001), and there was a moderate correlation with the patients' perceived usefulness (r=0.587) and importance (r=0.574) of using the internet for health information. There were also moderate correlations identified between the eHEALS score and the health literacy domains appraisal of health information (r=0.380) and ability to find good health information (r=0.561). Weak correlations with the mental health composite score (r=0.116) and physical health composite score (r=0.116) were identified.
conclusionsThis study provides new information on the psychometric properties of the eHEALS for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention, suggesting a multidimensional rather than unidimensional construct. However, the study also indicated a redundancy of items, indicating the need for further validation studies.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03810612; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03810612.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.