Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36833987›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Comparison of eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) and Digital Health Literacy Instrument (DHLI) in Assessing Electronic Health Literacy in Chinese Older Adults: A Mixed-Methods Approach.

Luyao Xie, Phoenix K H Mo

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. The level of electronic health literacy among older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Luyao XieCentre for Health Behaviours Research, JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5509-3732
Phoenix K H MoCentre for Health Behaviours Research, JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9822-5424

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study compared the reliability, construct validity, and respondents' preference of the Chinese version of 8-item eHEALS (C-eHEALS) and 21-item DHLI (C-DHLI) in assessing older adults' electronic health (eHealth) literacy using a mixed-methods approach. A web-based, cross-sectional survey was conducted among 277 Chinese older adults from September to October 2021, and 15 respondents were subsequently interviewed to understand their preference of scale to use in practice. Results showed that the internal consistency and test-retest reliability of both scales were satisfactory. For the construct validity, the C-DHLI score showed stronger positive correlations with having Internet use for health information and higher educational attainments, occupational skill levels, self-rated Internet skills, and health literacy than the C-eHEALS score. In addition, younger age, higher household income, urban residence, and longer Internet use history were only positively correlated with C-DHLI score. Qualitative data suggested that most interviewees perceived the C-DHLI as more readable than C-eHEALS for its clear structure, specific description, short sentence length, and less semantic complexity. Findings revealed that both scales are reliable tools to measure eHealth literacy among Chinese older adults, and the C-DHLI seemed to be a more valid and favored instrument for the general Chinese older population based on the quantitative and qualitative results.

Indexed as

Health LiteracyTelemedicineAgedCross-Sectional StudiesElectronicsHumansInternetReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesChinese older adultsDHLIeHEALSeHealth literacymixed methods

Identifiers

PMID36833987
PMCPMC9967021

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.