Dataset Information

Detecting Risk of Low Health Literacy in Disadvantaged Populations Using Area-based Measures.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Socio-economic status (SES) and low health literacy (LHL) are closely correlated. Both are directly associated with clinical and behavioral risk factors and healthcare outcomes. Learning healthcare systems are introducing small-area measures to address the challenges associated with maintaining patient-reported measures of SES and LHL. This study's purpose was to measure the association between two available census block measures associated with SES and LHL. Understanding the relationship can guide the identification of a multi-purpose area based measure for delivery system use.

Methods

A retrospective observational design was deployed using all US Census block groups in Utah. The principal dependent variable was a nationally-standardized health literacy score (HLS). The primary explanatory variable was a state-standardized area deprivation index (ADI). Statistical methods included linear regression and tests of association. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to develop LHL criteria using ADI.

Results

A significant negative association between the HLS and the ADI score remained after adjusting for area-level risk factors (β: -0.21 (95% CI: -0.22, -0.19) p < .001). Eighteen block groups (<1%) were identified as having LHL using HLS. A combination of three or more ADI components correlated with LHL predicted 78% of HLS LHL block groups and 35 additional block groups not identified using HLS (c-statistic: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.62, 0.66).

Conclusions

HLS and ADI use differing measurement criteria but are closely correlated. A state-based ADI detected additional neighborhoods with risk of LHL compared to use of a national HLS. An ADI represents a multi-purpose area measure of social determinants useful for learning health systems tailoring care.

SUBMITTER: Knighton AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5994951 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdolescence represents a crucial phase of life where health behaviours, attitudes and social determinants can have lasting impacts on health quality across the life course. Unhealthy behaviour in young people is generally more common in low socioeconomic groups. Nevertheless, all adolescents should have a fair opportunity to attain their full health potential. Health literacy is positioned as a potential mediating factor to improve health, but research regarding health literacy in adolescents and socially disadvantaged populations is limited. As part of Phase one of the Ophelia (OPtimising HEalth LIterAcy) framework, The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of socially disadvantaged Irish adolescents in relation to health literacy and related behaviours, and utilise this data to develop relevant vignettes.MethodsA convergent mixed method design was used to co-create the vignettes. Questionnaires were completed by 962 adolescents (males n = 553, females n = 409, Mean age = 13.97 ± 0.96 years) from five participating disadvantaged schools in Leinster, Ireland. Focus groups were also conducted in each school (n = 31). Results were synthesised using cluster and thematic analysis, to develop nine vignettes that represented typical male and female subgroups across the schools with varying health literacy profiles. These vignettes were then validated through triangular consensus with students, teachers, and researchers.DiscussionThe co-creation process was a participatory methodology which promoted the engagement and autonomy of the young people involved in the project. The vignettes themselves provide an authentic and tangible description of the health issues and health literacy profiles of adolescents in this context. Application of these vignettes in workshops involving students and teachers, will enable meaningful engagement in the discussion of health literacy and health-related behaviours in Irish young people, and the potential co-designing of strategies to address health literacy in youth.ConclusionAs guided by the Ophelia framework, the use of authentic, interactive and participatory research methods, such as the co-creation of vignettes, is particularly important in groups that are underserved by traditional research methods. The approach used in this study could be adapted to other contexts to represent and understand stakeholders' perceptions of health, with a view to explore, and ultimately improve, health literacy.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The lack of available measures that can reliably characterize early developmental skills in children with neurogenetic syndromes (NGS) poses a significant challenge for research on early development in these populations. Although syndrome-specific measures may sometimes be necessary, a more cost- and time-efficient solution would be to identify existing measures that are appropriate for use in special populations or optimize existing measures to be used in these groups. Reliability is an important metric of psychometric rigor to consider when auditing and optimizing assessment tools for NGS. In this study, we use Generalizability Theory, an extension of classical test theory, as a novel approach for more comprehensively characterizing the reliability of existing measures and making decisions about their use in the field of NGS research. METHODS:We conducted generalizability analyses on a popular early social communication screener, the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales-Infant-Toddler Checklist (CSBS-ITC), collected on 172 children (41 Angelman syndrome, 30 Prader-Willi syndrome, 42 Williams syndrome, 59 low-risk controls). RESULTS:Overall, the CSBS-ITC demonstrated at least adequate reliability in the NGS groups included in this study, particularly for the Prader-Willi and Williams syndrome groups. However, the sources of systematic error variance in the CSBS-ITC varied greatly between the low-risk control and NGS groups. Moreover, as unassessed in previous research, the CSBS-ITC demonstrated substantial differences in variance sources among the NGS groups. Reliability of CSBS-ITC scores was highest when averaging across all measurement points for a given child and was generally similar or better in the NGS groups compared to the low-risk control group. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings suggest that the CSBS-ITC communicates different information about the reliability of stability versus change, in low-risk control and NGS samples, respectively, and that psychometric approaches like Generalizability Theory can provide more complete information about the reliability of existing measures and inform decisions about how measures are used in research on early development in NGS.

Project description:BackgroundElectronic health (eHealth) has the potential to improve health outcomes. However, eHealth systems need to match the eHealth literacy needs of users to be equitably adopted. Socially disadvantaged groups have lower access and skills to use technologies and are at risk of being digitally marginalized, leading to the potential widening of health disparities.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to explore the role of eHealth literacy and user involvement in developing eHealth interventions targeted at socially disadvantaged groups.MethodsA systematic search was conducted across 10 databases for eHealth interventions targeted at older adults, ethnic minority groups, low-income groups, low-literacy groups, and rural communities. The eHealth Literacy Framework was used to examine the eHealth literacy components of reviewed interventions. The results were analyzed using narrative synthesis.ResultsA total of 51 studies reporting on the results of 48 interventions were evaluated. Most studies were targeted at older adults and ethnic minorities, with only 2 studies focusing on low-literacy groups. eHealth literacy was not considered in the development of any of the studies, and no eHealth literacy assessment was conducted. User involvement in designing interventions was limited, and eHealth intervention developmental frameworks were rarely used. Strategies to assist users in engaging with technical systems were seldom included in the interventions, and accessibility features were limited. The results of the included studies also provided inconclusive evidence on the effectiveness of eHealth interventions.ConclusionsThe findings highlight that eHealth literacy is generally overlooked in developing eHealth interventions targeted at socially disadvantaged groups, whereas evidence about the effectiveness of such interventions is limited. To ensure equal access and inclusiveness in the age of eHealth, eHealth literacy of disadvantaged groups needs to be addressed to help avoid a digital divide. This will assist the realization of recent technological advancements and, importantly, improve health equity.