Health Literacy Instrument for Adults-Short Form (HELIA-SF): Development and psychometric properties

M. Tavousi, A. Haeri-Mehrizi, J. Sedighi, Ali Montazeri, S. Mohammadi, M. Ardestani, F. Rezaei, Gholamhossein Veysi, Ramin Mozafari kermani, R. Rostami, Mozhgan Javadi, Fatemeh Sarbandi
{"title":"Health Literacy Instrument for Adults-Short Form (HELIA-SF): Development and psychometric properties","authors":"M. Tavousi, A. Haeri-Mehrizi, J. Sedighi, Ali Montazeri, S. Mohammadi, M. Ardestani, F. Rezaei, Gholamhossein Veysi, Ramin Mozafari kermani, R. Rostami, Mozhgan Javadi, Fatemeh Sarbandi","doi":"10.52547/payesh.21.3.309","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective(s): Since usually health literacy should be assessed in complex health care settings, this study aimed to develop a short version of the Health Literacy Instrument for Adults (HELIA-SF). Methods: In this methodological study, the research team selected a number of items from the main instrument covering the main constructs of the HELIA. The selection was based on the most relevant items to each construct. A group of 12 experts and ten adults assessed content and face validity respectively. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was performed to assess structural validity. The reliability of the instruments was evaluated by internal correlation (Cronbach's alpha coefficient) and intraclass correlation (ICC). Results: A nine-item questionnaire was developed. Experts identified the content validity of the short version as desirable (the CVR was more than 0.56, the CVI was more than 0.79). Also, the face validity as assessed by ten adults was satisfactory. The results obtained from exploratory factor analysis showed a two-factor structure for the questionnaire, namely basic skills and decision-making skills, that jointly accounted for about 61% of the variance observed. Furthermore, the confirmatory factor analysis indicated acceptable fit indexes for the data: X2/df =2.20, GFI=0.95, CFI=0.97, NFI=0.95, NNFI=0.96, SRMR=0.068, and RMSEA=0.074. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient and ICC for each of the two dimensions were satisfactory (alpha = 0.84 and 0.81 and ICC = 0.85 and 0.82). The values for the whole items were 0.91 and 0.81, respectively. Conclusion: The HELIA-SF, including nine items and two subscales (basic skills and decision-making skills), was found to be a reliable and valid instrument to measure health literacy in adults. This version is suitable for measuring health literacy in different urban and rural population groups due to its short and concise nature.","PeriodicalId":235399,"journal":{"name":"Health Monitor Journal of the Iranian Institute for Health Sciences Research","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Monitor Journal of the Iranian Institute for Health Sciences Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52547/payesh.21.3.309","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective(s): Since usually health literacy should be assessed in complex health care settings, this study aimed to develop a short version of the Health Literacy Instrument for Adults (HELIA-SF). Methods: In this methodological study, the research team selected a number of items from the main instrument covering the main constructs of the HELIA. The selection was based on the most relevant items to each construct. A group of 12 experts and ten adults assessed content and face validity respectively. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was performed to assess structural validity. The reliability of the instruments was evaluated by internal correlation (Cronbach's alpha coefficient) and intraclass correlation (ICC). Results: A nine-item questionnaire was developed. Experts identified the content validity of the short version as desirable (the CVR was more than 0.56, the CVI was more than 0.79). Also, the face validity as assessed by ten adults was satisfactory. The results obtained from exploratory factor analysis showed a two-factor structure for the questionnaire, namely basic skills and decision-making skills, that jointly accounted for about 61% of the variance observed. Furthermore, the confirmatory factor analysis indicated acceptable fit indexes for the data: X2/df =2.20, GFI=0.95, CFI=0.97, NFI=0.95, NNFI=0.96, SRMR=0.068, and RMSEA=0.074. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient and ICC for each of the two dimensions were satisfactory (alpha = 0.84 and 0.81 and ICC = 0.85 and 0.82). The values for the whole items were 0.91 and 0.81, respectively. Conclusion: The HELIA-SF, including nine items and two subscales (basic skills and decision-making skills), was found to be a reliable and valid instrument to measure health literacy in adults. This version is suitable for measuring health literacy in different urban and rural population groups due to its short and concise nature.
成人健康素养简易量表(HELIA-SF):发展与心理测量学性质
目标:由于通常应该在复杂的卫生保健环境中评估健康素养,本研究旨在开发成人健康素养工具(HELIA-SF)的简短版本。方法:在方法学研究中,研究小组从主要仪器中选择了一些项目,涵盖了HELIA的主要结构。选择是基于与每个结构最相关的项目。由12名专家和10名成人分别对内容效度和面部效度进行评估。采用探索性和验证性因素分析来评估结构效度。采用内相关(Cronbach’s alpha系数)和类内相关(ICC)评价仪器的可靠性。结果:编制了9项问卷。专家认为,短版本的内容效度是理想的(CVR大于0.56,CVI大于0.79)。此外,10名成人的面部效度评估也令人满意。探索性因子分析的结果显示,问卷的双因素结构,即基本技能和决策技能,共同占观察到的方差的61%左右。验证性因子分析得出数据可接受的拟合指标:X2/df =2.20, GFI=0.95, CFI=0.97, NFI=0.95, NNFI=0.96, SRMR=0.068, RMSEA=0.074。两个维度的Cronbach’s alpha系数和ICC均令人满意(alpha = 0.84和0.81,ICC = 0.85和0.82)。整个项目的值分别为0.91和0.81。结论:HELIA-SF量表包含9个项目和2个分量表(基本技能和决策技能),是一种可靠有效的成人健康素养测评工具。该版本由于其简短和简洁的性质,适用于衡量不同城市和农村人口群体的卫生素养。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信