ReviewEnvironmental health insights2026
Measuring Environmental Health Literacy - A Systematic Review of Represented Dimensions and Psychometric Characteristics of Evaluated Instruments in an Emerging Field.
Review in Environmental health insights, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental health literacy (EHL) encompasses the skills and competencies to search for, understand, assess, and apply information and knowledge about the environment and its impact on human health. The development and availability of concept-based, psychometrically sound methods to measure EHL are crucial for advancing research and assessing the impact of public health programs in prevention. Guided by the PRISMA-COSMIN guidelines, a systematic search of three databases was conducted (MEDLINE, LIVIVO, PsycINFO). Information on the characteristics, operationalization of EHL, and psychometric criteria was extracted. According to COSMIN, the psychometric properties were evaluated. Of 1,872 records, nine studies were included. Eight different EHL measures were identified. The instruments target either general EHL (n = 4) or specific environmental issues (n = 4), such as air pollution, drinking water contaminants, and phthalate exposure. Some instruments reported sufficient structural validity (n = 4) and internal consistency (n = 2), while content validity remained indeterminate (n = 8). Information on responsiveness, measurement error, and intercultural validity could not be obtained. Based on the quality assessment, no general recommendation for use can be derived. Future studies should focus on validating existing instruments, while the development of new tools should more comprehensively address relevant environmental factors. We also recommend that previously underexplored dimensions of EHL, such as self-efficacy and collective agency, should be given greater consideration.
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.