• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

基于与其他变量关系的电子健康素养问卷 (eHLQ) 的有效性证据:用于检验已知组有效性的贝叶斯方法。

Validity Evidence Based on Relations to Other Variables of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ): Bayesian Approach to Test for Known-Groups Validity.

机构信息

Centre for Global Health and Equity, School of Health Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Australia.

School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2021 Oct 14;23(10):e30243. doi: 10.2196/30243.

DOI:10.2196/30243
PMID:34647897
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8554672/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

As health resources and services are increasingly delivered through digital platforms, eHealth literacy is becoming a set of essential capabilities to improve consumer health in the digital era. To understand eHealth literacy needs, a meaningful measure is required. Strong initial evidence for the reliability and construct validity of inferences drawn from the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ) was obtained during its development in Denmark, but validity testing for varying purposes is an ongoing and cumulative process.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine validity evidence based on relations to other variables-using data collected with the known-groups approach-to further explore if the eHLQ is a robust tool to understand eHealth literacy needs in different contexts. A priori hypotheses are set for the expected score differences among age, sex, education, and information and communication technology (ICT) use for each of the 7 eHealth literacy constructs represented by the 7 eHLQ scales.

METHODS

A Bayesian mediated multiple indicators multiple causes model approach was used to simultaneously identify group differences and test measurement invariance through differential item functioning across the groups, with ICT use as a mediator. A sample size of 500 participants was estimated. Data were collected at 3 diverse health sites in Australia.

RESULTS

Responses from 525 participants were included for analysis. Being older was significantly related to lower scores in 4 eHLQ scales, with 3. Ability to actively engage with digital services having the strongest effect (total effect -0.37; P<.001), followed by 1. Using technology to process health information (total effect -0.32; P<.001), 5. Motivated to engage with digital services (total effect -0.21; P=.01), and 7. Digital services that suit individual needs (total effect -0.21; P=.02). However, the effects were only partially mediated by ICT use. Higher education was associated with higher scores in 1. Using technology to process health information (total effect 0.22; P=.01) and 3. Ability to actively engage with digital services (total effect 0.25; P<.001), with the effects mostly mediated by ICT use. Higher ICT use was related to higher scores in all scales except 2. Understanding health concepts and language and 4. Feel safe and in control. Either no or ignorable cases of differential item functioning were found across the 4 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

By using a Bayesian mediated multiple indicators multiple causes model, this study provides supportive validity evidence for the eHLQ based on relations to other variables as well as established evidence regarding internal structure related to measurement invariance across the groups for the 7 scales in the Australian community health context. This study also demonstrates that the eHLQ can be used to gain valuable insights into people's eHealth literacy needs to help optimize access and use of digital health and promote health equity.

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a831/8554672/91d5acc5cd9d/jmir_v23i10e30243_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a831/8554672/91d5acc5cd9d/jmir_v23i10e30243_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a831/8554672/91d5acc5cd9d/jmir_v23i10e30243_fig1.jpg
摘要

背景

随着健康资源和服务越来越多地通过数字平台提供,电子健康素养正成为提高数字时代消费者健康的一系列基本能力。为了了解电子健康素养需求,需要一个有意义的衡量标准。在丹麦开发电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)期间,已经获得了该问卷在可靠性和结构有效性推论方面的强有力初始证据,但针对不同目的的有效性测试是一个持续和累积的过程。

目的

本研究旨在通过使用已知群体方法收集的数据,基于与其他变量的关系来检验有效性证据,以进一步探讨 eHLQ 是否是一种了解不同背景下电子健康素养需求的可靠工具。根据 7 个 eHLQ 量表所代表的 7 个电子健康素养结构,针对每个结构的年龄、性别、教育和信息通信技术(ICT)使用之间的预期评分差异提出了先验假设。

方法

使用贝叶斯中介多指标多原因模型方法,同时通过跨组差异项目功能来识别组间差异并测试测量不变性,以 ICT 使用为中介。估计样本量为 500 名参与者。数据是在澳大利亚 3 个不同的健康场所收集的。

结果

对 525 名参与者的响应进行了分析。年龄较大与 4 个 eHLQ 量表的得分较低显著相关,其中 3. 积极参与数字服务的能力(总效应 -0.37;P<.001)的影响最强,其次是 1. 使用技术处理健康信息(总效应 -0.32;P<.001),5. 有动力参与数字服务(总效应 -0.21;P=.01),以及 7. 适合个人需求的数字服务(总效应 -0.21;P=.02)。然而,这些影响仅部分由 ICT 使用中介。较高的教育水平与 1. 使用技术处理健康信息(总效应 0.22;P=.01)和 3. 积极参与数字服务的能力(总效应 0.25;P<.001)的得分较高有关,这些影响主要由 ICT 使用中介。较高的 ICT 使用与除 2. 理解健康概念和语言以及 4. 感到安全和掌控之外的所有量表的得分较高有关。在 4 个组中,没有发现或忽略了差异项目功能的情况。

结论

通过使用贝叶斯中介多指标多原因模型,本研究提供了基于与其他变量的关系以及与群体内测量不变性相关的内部结构的支持性有效性证据,这是在澳大利亚社区健康背景下对 7 个量表进行的。本研究还表明,eHLQ 可用于深入了解人们的电子健康素养需求,以帮助优化数字健康的获取和使用,并促进健康公平。

相似文献

1
Validity Evidence Based on Relations to Other Variables of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ): Bayesian Approach to Test for Known-Groups Validity.基于与其他变量关系的电子健康素养问卷 (eHLQ) 的有效性证据:用于检验已知组有效性的贝叶斯方法。
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Oct 14;23(10):e30243. doi: 10.2196/30243.
2
Validity Evidence of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ) Part 2: Mixed Methods Approach to Evaluate Test Content, Response Process, and Internal Structure in the Australian Community Health Setting.电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)第二部分的有效性证据:在澳大利亚社区卫生环境中评估测试内容、反应过程和内部结构的混合方法研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Mar 8;24(3):e32777. doi: 10.2196/32777.
3
Validity Testing and Cultural Adaptation of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ) Among People With Chronic Diseases in Taiwan: Mixed Methods Study.电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)在台湾慢性病患者中的有效性检验和文化调适:混合方法研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Jan 19;24(1):e32855. doi: 10.2196/32855.
4
A Multidimensional Tool Based on the eHealth Literacy Framework: Development and Initial Validity Testing of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ).基于电子健康素养框架的多维工具:电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)的开发与初始效度测试
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Feb 12;20(2):e36. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8371.
5
Spanish and Catalan Versions of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire: Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation Study.电子健康素养问卷的西班牙语和加泰罗尼亚语版本:翻译、跨文化调适和验证研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 May 10;26:e49227. doi: 10.2196/49227.
6
Translation, cultural adaptation and validity assessment of the Dutch version of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire: a mixed-method approach.荷兰版电子健康素养问卷的翻译、文化调适和效度评估:混合方法研究。
BMC Public Health. 2023 May 30;23(1):1006. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-15869-4.
7
Serbian Version of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ): Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Validation Study Among Primary Health Care Users.电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)塞尔维亚语版:初级卫生保健用户翻译、文化调适和验证研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 May 9;26:e57963. doi: 10.2196/57963.
8
Co-designing eHealth and Equity Solutions: Application of the Ophelia (Optimizing Health Literacy and Access) Process.共同设计电子健康和公平解决方案:奥菲莉亚(优化健康素养和获取)过程的应用。
Front Public Health. 2020 Nov 20;8:604401. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.604401. eCollection 2020.
9
eHealth Literacy of Australian Undergraduate Health Profession Students: A Descriptive Study.澳大利亚本科健康专业学生的电子健康素养:一项描述性研究。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Aug 29;19(17):10751. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191710751.
10
Preliminary validity testing of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ): a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) in Norwegian hospitalized patients.电子健康素养问卷(eHLQ)的初步有效性检验:挪威住院患者的验证性因子分析(CFA)。
BMC Psychol. 2023 Nov 23;11(1):409. doi: 10.1186/s40359-023-01449-z.

引用本文的文献

1
Digital health literacy among the Spanish population: a descriptive and latent class analysis study.西班牙人群的数字健康素养:一项描述性和潜在类别分析研究。
Eur J Public Health. 2025 Aug 1;35(4):617-623. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckaf016.
2
Digital health literacy and sociodemographic factors among students in western Iran: a cross-sectional study.伊朗西部学生的数字健康素养与社会人口学因素:一项横断面研究
BMC Med Educ. 2025 Feb 7;25(1):206. doi: 10.1186/s12909-025-06774-y.
3
Assessing the Reliability and Validity of a Questionnaire Evaluating Medical Students' Attitudes, Knowledge, and Perceptions of Antibiotic Education and Antimicrobial Resistance in University Training.

本文引用的文献

1
Exploring access to, use of and benefits from population-oriented digital health services in Australia.探索澳大利亚面向人群的数字健康服务的可及性、使用情况和获益。
Health Promot Int. 2021 Aug 30;36(4):1105-1115. doi: 10.1093/heapro/daaa145.
2
Co-designing eHealth and Equity Solutions: Application of the Ophelia (Optimizing Health Literacy and Access) Process.共同设计电子健康和公平解决方案:奥菲莉亚(优化健康素养和获取)过程的应用。
Front Public Health. 2020 Nov 20;8:604401. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.604401. eCollection 2020.
3
Comparing multiple statistical software for multiple-indicator, multiple-cause modeling: an application of gender disparity in adult cognitive functioning using MIDUS II dataset.
评估一份问卷的信效度,该问卷用于评估医学生在大学培训中对抗生素教育和抗菌药物耐药性的态度、知识及认知。
Antibiotics (Basel). 2024 Nov 23;13(12):1126. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics13121126.
4
Variations in digital health literacy for pediatric caregivers of hospitalized children: implications for digital health equity.住院儿童的儿科护理人员数字健康素养的差异:对数字健康公平性的影响。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2025 Mar 1;32(3):572-578. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocae305.
5
eHealth Literacy and Health-Related Internet Use Among Swedish Primary Health Care Visitors: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.瑞典初级卫生保健就诊者的电子健康素养与健康相关互联网使用情况:横断面问卷调查研究
JMIR Form Res. 2024 Dec 5;8:e63288. doi: 10.2196/63288.
6
Validity and Reliability of a Questionnaire on Attitudes, Knowledge, and Perceptions of Pharmacy Students Regarding the Training Received on Antibiotics and Antimicrobial Resistance during Their University Studies.一份关于药学专业学生对大学期间接受的抗生素及抗菌药物耐药性培训的态度、知识和认知的问卷的效度和信度
Antibiotics (Basel). 2024 Aug 26;13(9):811. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics13090811.
7
Digital Health Literacy and Its Association With Sociodemographic Characteristics, Health Resource Use, and Health Outcomes: Rapid Review.数字健康素养及其与社会人口学特征、健康资源利用和健康结果的关联:快速综述
Interact J Med Res. 2024 Jul 26;13:e46888. doi: 10.2196/46888.
8
Restricted health service utilization and subsequent positive self-care behavior during the early COVID-19 pandemic in China.中国 COVID-19 大流行早期受限的卫生服务利用与随后的积极自我保健行为。
Front Public Health. 2024 Jul 9;12:1398271. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1398271. eCollection 2024.
9
Health literacy strengths and needs among migrant communities from Portuguese-speaking African countries in Portugal: a cross-sectional study.葡萄牙境内葡语非洲国家移民群体的健康素养优势和需求:一项横断面研究。
Front Public Health. 2024 Jul 3;12:1415588. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1415588. eCollection 2024.
10
Centering Digital Health Equity During Technology Innovation: Protocol for a Comprehensive Scoping Review of Evidence-Based Tools and Approaches.在技术创新中关注数字健康公平:基于循证工具和方法的综合范围综述议定书。
JMIR Res Protoc. 2024 Jun 5;13:e53855. doi: 10.2196/53855.
比较多种统计软件在多指标、多原因模型中的应用:以 MIDUS II 数据集为例,分析成年认知功能的性别差异。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Nov 12;20(1):275. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01150-4.
4
ehealth literacy and health literacy among immigrants and their descendants compared with women of Danish origin: a cross-sectional study using a multidimensional approach among pregnant women.与丹麦裔女性相比,移民及其后代的电子健康素养和健康素养:一项对孕妇采用多维度方法的横断面研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 May 7;10(5):e037076. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037076.
5
Health literacy, digital literacy and eHealth literacy in Danish nursing students at entry and graduate level: a cross sectional study.丹麦本科及研究生阶段护理专业学生的健康素养、数字素养和电子健康素养:一项横断面研究。
BMC Nurs. 2020 Apr 10;19:22. doi: 10.1186/s12912-020-00418-w. eCollection 2020.
6
Testing Measurement Properties of the Norwegian Version of Electronic Health Literacy Scale (eHEALS) in a Group of Day Surgery Patients.在一组日间手术患者中测试挪威版电子健康素养量表(eHEALS)的测量属性。
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2020 Mar 9;13:241-247. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S242985. eCollection 2020.
7
Differences in the Level of Electronic Health Literacy Between Users and Nonusers of Digital Health Services: An Exploratory Survey of a Group of Medical Outpatients.数字健康服务使用者与非使用者之间的电子健康素养水平差异:一组门诊患者的探索性调查
Interact J Med Res. 2019 Apr 5;8(2):e8423. doi: 10.2196/ijmr.8423.
8
Older Adult Internet Use and eHealth Literacy.老年人的互联网使用与电子健康素养。
J Appl Gerontol. 2020 Feb;39(2):141-150. doi: 10.1177/0733464818807468. Epub 2018 Oct 24.
9
Electronic Health Literacy Across the Lifespan: Measurement Invariance Study.全生命周期的电子健康素养:测量不变性研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Jul 9;20(7):e10434. doi: 10.2196/10434.
10
eHealth and adolescents in Serbia: psychometric properties of eHeals questionnaire and contributing factors to better online health literacy.电子健康与塞尔维亚青少年:电子健康素养量表的心理测量特性及其对提高在线健康素养的影响因素。
Health Promot Int. 2019 Aug 1;34(4):770-778. doi: 10.1093/heapro/day028.