ArticleBMC medical education2024
Development and reliability and validity testing of a medication literacy scale for medical college students.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. 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.
- Evaluating the impact of faculty performance appraisal systems on curriculum development and laboratory innovation in pharmaceutical education.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Development, Reliability, and Validity of the Treatment Decision-Making Needs Assessment Scale for Chinese Cancer Patients.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Introducing professional drug information resources to non-healthcare undergraduates: a case report on promoting drug information literacy.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2026Article
- Assessing Medication Literacy and Its Determinants in Chinese Patients with Multimorbidity.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
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
backgroundIrrational drug use has become a global problem threatening human health. As future health professionals, medical college students' medication literacy (ML) is critical. Their mastery of medication-related knowledge will directly affect public medication safety in the future.
methodsThe initial scale was developed through a literature review and was modified through expert consultation and student interviews to form the initial scale with 14 items. In 2020, a questionnaire survey was conducted among students in a medical college for item analysis, reliability test, validity test and other analyses.
resultsThe total Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.826 and split-half reliability was 0.852. The Cronbach's α coefficients for functional medication literacy, communicative medication literacy, and critical medication literacy were 0.901, 0.858, and 0.851, respectively. The item-level content validity index (I-CVI) ranged from 0.833 to 1.000 (≥ 0.78). Factor analysis of 14 items showed that KMO = 0. 852(> 0.7) and Bartlett's spherical test p < 0.001, indicating that the data are very suitable for factor analysis. Three principal axis factors were extracted by principal component analysis, and the total variance interpretation rate was 69.031% (> 40%). The confirmatory factor analysis identified a three-factor model and showed goodness of fit indices for the scale: The χ²/df = 2.623, The Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.905, The Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.950, Normed Fit Index (NFI) = 0.922, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 0.938, and The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.078.
conclusionA new scale for evaluating the medication literacy of Chinese medical college students was preliminarily developed, demonstrating good reliability and validity. Itcan be used as a preliminary measurement tool for assessing medical students' medication literacy. However, due to the limitations of this study, the practical application of the scale needs to be further examined in a larger sample and should be refined in future studies.
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.