ArticlePloS one2024
Assessment of the psychometric properties of the eHealth Literacy Scale for Brazilian adolescents.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- eHealth Literacy and Adolescent Health in Japanese Female High School Students in Sendai: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the increase in digitalization of adolescents and health services, the population must demonstrate digital health literacy skills to be able to navigate online health information, as well as identify, evaluate, and apply relevant information. The present study aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the adapted version of the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS-BrA) for Brazilian adolescents. This study was conducted between September 2022 and May 2023, involving a total of 260 adolescents aged 13 to 19, with a mean age of 15.64 years (SD = 1.84), all of whom were enrolled in public schools in Brazil. Structural validity was evaluated by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The reliability of the instrument was assessed using Cronbach's alpha (α) and McDonald's omega (ω), and test-retest reliability. Questionnaires about sociodemographic aspects, health-related characteristics, and internet use were administered and used as discriminant validation measures. Convergent Validity was determined by correction with the domains of the World Health Organization Quality of Life-Bref (WHOQOL-Bref) instrument. For test-retest reliability, 67 participants completed the eHEALS-BrA a fortnight later. The average eHEALS-BrA score was 28.05 points (SD = 5.05). CFA revealed that the model with the best fit had a single factor (χ2 = 49.884 [df = 20, p = 0.0002], CFI = 0.934, TLI = 0.908, RMSEA = 0.076(CI:0.05-0.10), and SRMR = 0.045). The instrument demonstrated good reliability, with satisfactory internal consistency (α and ω = 0.71) and stability (ICC = 0.82, 95% CI:0.70-0.89). The eHEALS-BrA was correlated with the physical, psychological, and environmental domains of the WHOQOL-Bref (p = 0.001) (convergent validity). Higher scores were found among male adolescents, individuals who practiced physical activity, those with better self-rated health, those who considered the internet useful for searching for health information (discriminant validity), and those with better self-rated skills related to using the internet (convergent validity) (p < 0.05). The eHEALS-BrA demonstrated adequate psychometric properties for measuring digital health literacy in Brazilian adolescents.
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.