Dataset Information

How Do Subjective Health Literacy Measures Work in Young Adults? Specifying "Online" or "Paper-Based" Forms Impacts Results.

ABSTRACT: Purpose. There is no gold-standard health literacy measure. The Single Item Literacy Screener (SILS) and Subjective Literacy Screener (SLS) ask people to self-report ability to understand health information. They were developed in older adults, before common use of electronic health information. This study explored whether the SILS and SLS related to objective literacy, numeracy, and comprehension among young adults, and whether specifying "online" or "paper-based" wording affected these relationships. Methods. Eligible individuals (18-35 years of age, English-speaking, US residents) from an online survey company were randomized to 1) original measures; 2) measures adding "paper-based" to describe health information/forms; or 3) measures adding "online" to describe health information/forms. We examined how each measure related to e-Health Literacy (eHEALS), subjective numeracy (SNS), objective numeracy (ONS), and comprehension of a short passage. Results. A total of 848/1342 respondents correctly answered attention-checks and were analyzed. The validated SILS related to comprehension (P = 0.003), eHEALS (P = 0.04), and ONS (P < 0.001) but not SNS (P = 0.44). When adding "paper-based," SILS related to eHEALS (P < 0.001) and ONS (P = 0.003) but did not relate to comprehension (P = 0.25) or SNS (P = 0.35). When adding "online," SILS related to comprehension (P < 0.001), eHEALS (P < 0.001), ONS (P = 0.005), and SNS (P = 0.03). The validated SLS related to comprehension (P < 0.001), eHEALS (P < 0.001), ONS (P < 0.001), and SNS (P < 0.001). When adding "paper-based," the SLS only related to eHEALS (P = <0.001) and comprehension (P = 0.03) but did not relate to ONS (P = 0.13) or SNS (P = 0.33). When adding "online," the SLS related to comprehension (P < 0.001), eHEALS (P < 0.001), and SNS (P = 0.03) but not ONS (P = 0.06). Conclusions. Young adults might interpret subjective health literacy measures differently when prompted to think about electronic or paper-based information. Researchers should consider clearer instructions or modified wording when using these measures in this population.

SUBMITTER: Politi MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7263163 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan-Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How Do Subjective Health Literacy Measures Work in Young Adults? Specifying "Online" or "Paper-Based" Forms Impacts Results.

Politi Mary C MC Goodwin Courtney M CM Kaphingst Kimberly A KA Wang Xuechen X Fagerlin Angela A Fuzzell Lindsay N LN Philpott-Streiff Sydney E SE

MDM policy & practice 20200101 1

<b>Purpose.</b> There is no gold-standard health literacy measure. The Single Item Literacy Screener (SILS) and Subjective Literacy Screener (SLS) ask people to self-report ability to understand health information. They were developed in older adults, before common use of electronic health information. This study explored whether the SILS and SLS related to objective literacy, numeracy, and comprehension among young adults, and whether specifying "online" or "paper-based" wording affected these ...[more]

PMID: 32529034

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: While occupational factors linked to the onset of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) have been reported among workers, much remains unknown about the impacts that occupation has on the onset of CVDs in various age groups. We attempted to describe temporal trends in total and work-related CVDs (WRCVDs) rates stratified by age and year and explore the relative contributions of work to the CVD risk. Methods: This study was conducted using two populations from the Labor Insurance Database as the working population and the National Health Insurance Research Database as the general population. We included all people aged 15?75 years from 2006 to 2013. All CVD events and WRCVD events were identified. A Poisson regression was used to estimate the morbidity rate ratio (RR) stratified by age and period, and an RR adjusted for residual confounding was also used. Results: Incident CVD rates increased with aging in the general population (from 1113.55 to 1853.32 per 100,000 persons), and WRCVD rates increased in the working population over time (from 2.10 in 2006 to 8.60 in 2013 per 100,000 persons). In the age and period analysis, CVD attacks showed disparities in different populations. The RR of the WRCVD risk was mainly in the working population aged >45 years, and the RR of the CVD risk occurred in the oldest group (aged 55?64 years) of the general population. The population-attributable risk of working exposure was 13.5%. After eliminating residual confounding factors, higher population attributed risk (PAR) work-related excessive CVD risk mainly occurred in workers aged 25?34 and 35?44 years. A decreasing PAR trend was found in the age groups as follows: 15?24, 25?34, 35?44, 45?54, and 55?64 years, with percentages of 17.64%, 16.89%, 16.46%, 10.6%, and 0.65%, respectively. Conclusions: There is evidence that period and age trends of CVD rates differed between the working population and general population. Relative effects attributed to work were more severe in younger workers, particularly in workers aged <55 years.

Dataset Information

How Do Subjective Health Literacy Measures Work in Young Adults? Specifying "Online" or "Paper-Based" Forms Impacts Results.

Publications

How Do Subjective Health Literacy Measures Work in Young Adults? Specifying "Online" or "Paper-Based" Forms Impacts Results.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure