ArticleBMC public health2026
Psychometric properties of the European health literacy survey questionnaire short-short form (HLS-EU-Q6) among Slovenian youth, adults, and older adults.
Article in BMC public health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealth literacy is an important determinant of health behaviours and self-rated health, making brief, valid, and reliable assessment tools essential. The six-item European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire (HLS-EU-Q6) has rarely been validated across age groups and has not been validated in Slovenia. This study evaluated its validity and reliability among youth, adults, and older adults.
methodsData were drawn from the Health Literacy of Adults in Slovenia survey (HLS-SI19; N = 3,360), including youth (18-30 years), adults (31-64 years), and older adults (65 + years). Construct validity was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis and Item Response Theory (Samejima's Graded Response Model); convergent, discriminant, concurrent, concurrent-predictive, and predictive (criterion-related) validity, together with internal reliability, were assessed using correlations and hierarchical regression analyses.
resultsA one-factor structure demonstrated good fit among older adults but weaker fit among youth, adults, and the total sample. IRT analyses showed satisfactory item discrimination and measurement precision, although four items showed age-related differential item functioning, indicating partial measurement invariance across age groups. Internal consistency was satisfactory across all groups (Cronbach's α = 0.76-0.84). Discriminant validity relative to communicative and navigational health literacy, and concurrent validity with the HLS-EU-Q47 (r = 0.892), were supported in all age groups. Predictive validity appeared stronger among adults and older adults than among youth: among younger participants health literacy predicted only self-rated health, whereas among adults and older adults it also predicted more favourable attitudes toward vaccination.
conclusionsThe Slovenian HLS-EU-Q6 is a reliable and practical screening instrument, particularly for adults and older adults, although its construct and predictive validity among youth warrant further age-sensitive refinement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42920137What 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.