ArticleDigital health
Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the media Health Literacy Questionnaire: A validation study.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the BENEFITS-CCCSAT based on CTT and IRT: a cross-sectional design translation and validation study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Measuring Instruments for Media Health Literacy: A Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2024Review
- Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the media health literacy questionnaire (MeHLit-SV).Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Translation and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Digital Competence Questionnaire for clinical nurses.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The media play an important role in health promotion and disease prevention, while at the same time, a variety of mixed health messages in the media are beginning to pose new challenges to them. However, there is a lack of media health literacy (MHL) assessment tools in China. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to translate the Media Health Literacy (MeHLit) questionnaire into Chinese and to assess its psychometric properties. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted from October to December 2022, and a methodological study of the translation and validation of the MeHLit questionnaire was conducted. Results: As a result of an extensive translation and cultural adaptation process, the final MeHLit questionnaire was developed, which includes five dimensions and 21 items. Cronbach's α value of the questionnaire was 0.859, and Cronbach's α value of the dimensions ranged from 0.776 to 0.911, which is fairly good. As a result, the test-retest reliability coefficient and the split-half reliability coefficient of the questionnaire are both equal to 0.907. Its content validity index was 0.946, suggesting a reasonable level of content validity. Through exploratory factor analysis, a five-factor structure was identified based on the eigenvalues, total variance explained, and scree plot. As a result of the validation factor analysis, all recommended fit indicators were appropriate. Conclusion: The Chinese version of the MeHLit questionnaire has been successfully introduced in China. It has shown good psychometric properties among the Chinese public and can be used as a tool to evaluate MHL in health screening.
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.