41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Advancing Health Literacy Measurement: A Pathway to Better Health and Health System Performance

      research-article
      a , *
      Journal of Health Communication
      Taylor & Francis Group

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The concept of health literacy initially emerged and continues to gain strength as an approach to improving health status and the performance of health systems. Numerous studies clearly link low levels of education, literacy, and health literacy with poor health, poor health care utilization, increased barriers to care, and early death. However, theoretical understandings and methods of measuring the complex social construct of health literacy have experienced a continual evolution that remains incomplete. As a result, the seemingly most-cited definition of health literacy proposed in the now-decade-old Institute of Medicine report on health literacy is long overdue for updating. Such an effort should engage a broad and diverse set of health literacy researchers, practitioners, and members of the public in creating a definition that can earn broad consensus through validation testing in a rigorous scientific approach. That effort also could produce the basis for a new universally applicable measure of health literacy. Funders, health systems, and policymakers should reconsider their timid approach to health literacy. Although the field and corresponding evidence base are not perfect, health literacy—especially when combined with a focus on prevention and integrative health—is one of the most promising approaches to advancing public health.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy.

          No practical method for identifying patients with low heath literacy exists. We sought to develop screening questions for identifying patients with inadequate or marginal health literacy. Patients (n=332) at a VA preoperative clinic completed in-person interviews that included 16 health literacy screening questions on a 5-point Likert scale, followed by a validated health literacy measure, the Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (STOHFLA). Based on the STOFHLA, patients were classified as having either inadequate, marginal, or adequate health literacy. Each of the 16 screening questions was evaluated and compared to two comparison standards: (1) inadequate health literacy and (2) inadequate or marginal health literacy on the STOHFLA. Fifteen participants (4.5%) had inadequate health literacy and 25 (7.5%) had marginal health literacy on the STOHFLA. Three of the screening questions, "How often do you have someone help you read hospital materials?" "How confident are you filling out medical forms by yourself?" and "How often do you have problems learning about your medical condition because of difficulty understanding written information?" were effective in detecting inadequate health literacy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.87, 0.80, and 0.76, respectively). These questions were weaker for identifying patients with marginal health literacy. Three questions were each effective screening tests for inadequate health literacy in this population.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale.

            Basic numeracy skills are necessary before patients can understand the risks of medical treatments. Previous research has used objective measures, similar to mathematics tests, to evaluate numeracy. To design a subjective measure (i.e., self-assessment) of quantitative ability that distinguishes low- and high-numerate individuals yet is less aversive, quicker to administer, and more usable for telephone and Internet surveys than existing numeracy measures. Paper-and-pencil questionnaires. The general public (N = 703) surveyed at 2 hospitals. Forty-nine subjective numeracy questions were compared to measures of objective numeracy. An 8-item measure, the Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS), was developed through several rounds of testing. Four items measure people's beliefs about their skill in performing various mathematical operations, and 4 measure people's preferences regarding the presentation of numerical information. The SNS was significantly correlated with Lipkus and others' objective numeracy scale (correlations: 0.63-0.68) yet was completed in less time (24 s/item v. 31 s/item, P < 0.05) and was perceived as less stressful (1.62 v. 2.69, P < 0.01) and less frustrating (1.92 v. 2.88, P < 0.01). Fifty percent of participants who completed the SNS volunteered to participate in another study, whereas only 8% of those who completed the Lipkus and others scale similarly volunteered (odds ratio = 11.00, 95% confidence interval = 2.14-56.65). The SNS correlates well with mathematical test measures of objective numeracy but can be administered in less time and with less burden. In addition, it is much more likely to leave participants willing to participate in additional research and shows much lower rates of missing or incomplete data.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Health literacy: report of the Council on Scientific Affairs. Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy for the Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association.

              Patients with the greatest health care needs may have the least ability to read and comprehend information needed to function successfully as patients. To examine the scope and consequences of poor health literacy in the United States, characterize its implications for patients and physicians, and identify policy and research issues. The 12 members of the Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy, American Medical Association Council on Scientific Affairs, were selected by a key informant process as experts in the field of health literacy from a variety of backgrounds in clinical medicine, medical and health services research, medical education, psychology, adult literacy, nursing, and health education. Literature review using the MEDLINE database for January 1966 through October 1, 1996, searching Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) reading combined with text words health or literacy in the title, abstract, or MeSH. A subsequent search using reading as a search term identified articles published between 1993 and August 1998. Authors of relevant published abstracts were asked to provide manuscripts. Experts in health services research, health education, and medical law identified proprietary and other unpublished references. Consensus among committee members was reached through review of 216 published articles and additional unpublished manuscripts and telephone and Internet conferencing. All committee members approved the final report. Patients with inadequate health literacy have a complex array of communications difficulties, which may interact to influence health outcome. These patients report worse health status and have less understanding about their medical conditions and treatment. Preliminary studies indicate inadequate health literacy may increase the risk of hospitalization. Professional and public awareness of the health literacy issue must be increased, beginning with education of medical students and physicians and improved patient-physician communication skills. Future research should focus on optimal methods of screening patients to identify those with poor health literacy, effective health education techniques, outcomes and costs associated with poor health literacy, and the causal pathway of how poor health literacy influences health.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Health Commun
                J Health Commun
                uhcm20
                UHCM
                Journal of Health Communication
                Taylor & Francis Group
                1081-0730
                1087-0415
                2 December 2014
                9 December 2014
                : 19
                : 12
                : 1481-1496
                Affiliations
                [ a ]Canyon Ranch Institute , Tucson, Arizona, USA
                Author notes
                Senior Director for Health Literacy and Research, Canyon Ranch Institute, 8600 E. Rockcliff Road , Tucson, AZ, 85750, USA E-mail: andrew@ 123456canyonranchinstitute.org
                Article
                954083 Journal of Health Communication, Vol. 19, No. 12, December, 2014: pp. 1481–1496
                10.1080/10810730.2014.954083
                4292229
                25491583
                2bf66c51-470a-46e6-bbbf-5613a46722e2
                Copyright Andrew Pleasant

                This is an Open Access article. Non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly attributed, cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way, is permitted. The moral rights of the named author(s) have been asserted.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 3, References: 73, Pages: 16
                Categories
                Special Section: Evaluating Health Communication Programs

                Communication & Media studies
                Communication & Media studies

                Comments

                Comment on this article