ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
Development and validation of a comprehensive health literacy tool for adults in Hong Kong.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Relationship Between Health Literacy and Adherence to Physical Activity Guidelines in Adults: A Scoping Review.American journal of health promotion : AJHP · 2026Review
- Development and initial validation of a modular life-course health education and science communication needs scale for Chinese clinical and community service users: a Tianjin-based study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Development and psychometric evaluation of the sarcopenia prevention behavior adherence scale for older adults - a mixed methods study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Development and preliminary validation of the nutrition literacy scale for type 2 diabetes mellitus in China-a mixed methods study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the health behavior motivation scale: a translation and validation study.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Development and validation of the Health Literacy Index for the Community for the Korean National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey.Epidemiology and health · 2024Article
- Associations between Health Literacy, Trust, and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: The Case of Hong Kong.Vaccines · 2023Article
- A latent class analysis of community-based rehabilitation needs among Chinese older adults: a mixed study protocol.Frontiers in public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Health literacy (HL) refers to an individual's ability to process and use health information to make health-related decisions. However, previous HL scales did not fully cover all aspects of this concept. This study aimed to develop a comprehensive Hong Kong HL scale (HLS-HK) and evaluate its psychometric properties among Chinese adults. Methods: A scale of 31-item covering Nutbeam's framework, namely functional and interactive HL (FHL and IHL), and critical HL (CHL) within three subdomains: critical appraisal of information, understanding of social determinants of health, and actions to address social determinants of health, was developed based on previous literature review and Delphi survey. Cognitive interviews were performed to examine all items' face validity in terms of three aspects: comprehensiveness, clarity, and acceptability. A cross-sectional survey was conducted to investigate the scale's psychometric properties, including its internal consistency reliability, factorial structure validity, convergent validity, and predictive validity. Results: Nine interviewees participated in the cognitive interviews in October 2021. Based on the input from respondents, two items were deleted, two items were combined, and several items' wording was revised. The other items were clear and readable. Finally, 28 items remained. A total of 433 adults completed the questionnaire survey between December 2021 and February 2022. After excluding one item with low inter-item correlations, the scale's internal consistency reliability was acceptable, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.89. Exploratory factor analysis produced a five-factor model, as shown in the original theoretical framework. These factors accounted for 53% of the total variance. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that the fit indices for this model were acceptable (comparative fit index = 0.91, root mean square error of approximation = 0.06, and root mean square residual = 0.06). The scale is also significantly correlated with theoretically selected variables, including education and self-rated health. Conclusion: The HLS-HK is a valid and reliable tool for evaluating HL. Compared with existing tools, this scale extended the operationalization of FHL, IHL, and CHL and fully operationalized the CHL
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.