ArticleBMC psychology2023
Preliminary validity testing of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ): a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) in Norwegian hospitalized patients.
Article in BMC psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Translation and Psychometric Validation of the Amharic eHealth Literacy Questionnaire: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Measuring eHealth Literacy in the European Economic Area, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Development and evaluation of a 15-item health literacy classification model using integrated psychometric approaches in China.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Digital health literacy and sociodemographic characteristics of patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty-a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Predicting older adults smart healthcare adoption using an extended TAM.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- eHealth Literacy Assessment Instruments: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Digital health literacy among the Spanish population: a descriptive and latent class analysis study.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- A Digital Outpatient Service With a Mobile App for Tailored Care and Health Literacy in Adults With Long-Term Health Service Needs: Multicenter Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Article
- Validation of the Arabic eHealth literacy questionnaire: a factor and Rasch analysis study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Digital health literacy in Norwegian patients with hip and knee arthroplasty: normative data from a cross-sectional study.Acta orthopaedica · 2024Article
- Profiles of health literacy and digital health literacy in clusters of hospitalised patients: a single-centre, cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Exploring digital health literacy clusters in a Norwegian stroke survivor population-A cross-sectional study (NORFAST).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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo perform the first psychometric analysis of the Norwegian version of the eHLQ using confirmative factor analysis (CFA) procedures in a population of patients admitted to hospital using a cross-sectional design. The eHLQ consists of 35 items capturing the 7-dimensional eHealth Literacy Framework (eHLF) which describes users' attributes, user's interaction with technologies and user's experience with digital health systems.
methodsThe 7 independent scales of the eHLQ was translated from Danish and culturally adapted into the Norwegian language following a standardised protocol. Assessment of construct validity of the eHLQ was undertaken using data from a cross-sectional survey of 260 patients hospitalized at a Norwegian University Hospital in the Oslo area during a two-week period in June 2021. The analysis included using correlation analysis (Pearsons R), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
resultsAll factor loadings were high to acceptable (i.e. > 0.6), except for five items which had somewhat lower loadings. Regarding internal consistency, alpha ranged from 0.73 to 0.90. For optimal CFA fit for the different scale models, correlated residuals were required for five of the seven scales. Overall our analysis shows an intermediate fit of the orginal construct. Scale intercorrelations were all below 0.8, indicating an overall acceptable discriminant validity between the 7 dimensions.
conclusionsThe results from the CFA analysis indicate that for almost all 7 eHLQ scales, an acceptable model fit was achieved. The 260 hospitalized patients included in this study represented a variety of diagnoses, recruited from a geographically limited area. Further studies on psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of eHLQ in larger samples, diverse settings and by using more comprehensive approaches are warranted.
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.