ArticleBMC medical education2025
Development and validation of the Information Literacy Measurement Scale (ILMS-34) in Chinese public health practitioners.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPublic health professionals (PHPs) have increasing information needs to inform evidence-based public health decisions and practice, which requires good information literacy. A comprehensive and reliable assessment tool is necessary to assess PHPs' literacy and guide future promotion programs. However, there is a lack of measurement tools specifically for the information literacy of PHPs.
objectivesThis study aimed to develop an information literacy assessment tool for PHPs and test its psychometric properties among PHPs.
methodsA 34-item Information Literacy Measurement Scale (ILMS-34) for PHPs was developed based on an extensive literature review, the Delphi method, and pilot testing. The ILMS-34 was further validated among 526 PHPs recruited from four cities in Guangdong Province, China, using convenience sampling. The sample was randomly divided into two equal groups for exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), respectively. Other psychometric testing included item analysis, Cronbach's α coefficient, three-week test-retest reliability, and known-group validity.
resultsEFA yielded four dimensions for the ILMS-34: information consciousness, information knowledge, information ability, and information ethics. Subsequent CFA showed a good model fit of the four-factor structure (χ
conclusionThe ILMS-34 is a multidimensional instrument with good psychometric properties and can be used as an effective tool to measure information literacy among PHPs. Further validation in other samples across various cultures is needed to test its broad application.
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.