ArticleBMC medical education2026
Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the interdisciplinary digital literacy scale for medical students: the Turkish version (DLAD-TR).
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs digital technologies increasingly shape healthcare delivery and education, Turkish medical education still lacks a culturally equivalent and psychometrically validated instrument to assess these skills among clinical-year students. The aim of this study is to adapt the Digital Literacy Across Disciplines Scale (DLAD) into Turkish culture and evaluate the psychometric properties of the DLAD-TR.
methodsThis methodological validation study was conducted with clinical-year medical students (n = 480) at Gaziantep University Faculty of Medicine. The cross-cultural adaptation process included forward-backward translation, expert panel review, and pilot testing. Construct validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis (principal axis factoring with Promax rotation) and confirmatory factor analysis (maximum likelihood estimation). Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, and composite reliability, and temporal stability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC; two-way mixed-effects, absolute agreement) based on a two-week test-retest interval.
resultsSuitability for factor analysis was confirmed by the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value (0.843) and a significant Bartlett's test of sphericity. In the final EFA solution, one item (Q10) with cross-loadings was removed, resulting in a 23-item, three-factor structure. CFA (n = 240) indicated that the model demonstrated acceptable fit indices. In the test-retest subsample (n = 16), intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.52 to 0.78 for the subscales and 0.72 for the total score, indicating acceptable but imprecise temporal stability due to the small subsample size.
conclusionThe DLAD-TR appears to be a valid and reliable instrument for assessing digital literacy in clinical-year medical students using three factors and 23 items. The scale may facilitate needs assessment of digital literacy in medical education, support the planning of targeted educational interventions, and enable pre-post evaluation of such interventions.
trial registrationNot applicable. This study did not involve a healthcare intervention or a clinical trial.
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.