Development and Validation of the Digital Health Literacy Questionnaire for Stroke Survivors: Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Study.

IF 5.8 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Qin Ye, Wei Wang, Xuan Zeng, Yuxian Kuang, Bingbing Geng, Song Zhou, Ning Liu
{"title":"Development and Validation of the Digital Health Literacy Questionnaire for Stroke Survivors: Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Study.","authors":"Qin Ye, Wei Wang, Xuan Zeng, Yuxian Kuang, Bingbing Geng, Song Zhou, Ning Liu","doi":"10.2196/64591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In China, there is limited research on digital health literacy (DHL) among patients with stroke. This is mainly due to the lack of validated tools, which hinders the precision and sustainability of our country's digital transformation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to develop and validate a DHL scale specifically for stroke survivors in China.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used a sequential, exploratory, mixed methods approach to develop a DHL questionnaire for stroke survivors. This study comprised 418 patients with stroke aged 18 years and older. To evaluate the questionnaire's psychometric qualities, we randomly assigned individuals to 2 groups (subsample 1: n=118, subsample 2: n=300). Construct validity was evaluated through internal consistency analysis, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, hypothesis testing for structural validity, measurement invariance assessments using the eHealth Literacy Scale, and Rasch analyses to determine the questionnaire's validity and reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study underwent 4 stages of systematic development. The initial pool of items contained 25 items, 5 of which were eliminated after content validity testing; 19 items were subsequently retained through cognitive interviews. After an interitem correlation analysis, 2 more items were excluded, leaving 17 items for exploratory factor analysis. Finally, 2 items were excluded by Rasch analysis, resulting in a final version of the questionnaire containing 15 items. The total score range of the scale was 15-75, with higher scores indicating greater DHL competence. Results showed that principal component analysis confirmed the theoretical structure of the questionnaire (69.212% explained variance). The factor model fit was good with χ<sup>2</sup><sub>4</sub>=1.669; root mean square error of approximation=0.047; Tucker-Lewis Index=0.973; and Comparative Fit Index=0.977. In addition, hypothesis-testing construct validity with the eHealth Literacy Scale revealed a strong correlation (r=0.853). The internal consistency (Cronbach α) coefficient was 0.937. The retest reliability coefficient was 0.941. Rasch analysis demonstrated the item separation index was 3.81 (reliability 0.94) and the individual separation index was 2.91 (reliability 0.89).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The DHL Questionnaire for Stroke Survivors is a reliable and valid measure to assess DHL among stroke survivors in China.</p>","PeriodicalId":16337,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Internet Research","volume":"27 ","pages":"e64591"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Internet Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/64591","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In China, there is limited research on digital health literacy (DHL) among patients with stroke. This is mainly due to the lack of validated tools, which hinders the precision and sustainability of our country's digital transformation.

Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate a DHL scale specifically for stroke survivors in China.

Methods: We used a sequential, exploratory, mixed methods approach to develop a DHL questionnaire for stroke survivors. This study comprised 418 patients with stroke aged 18 years and older. To evaluate the questionnaire's psychometric qualities, we randomly assigned individuals to 2 groups (subsample 1: n=118, subsample 2: n=300). Construct validity was evaluated through internal consistency analysis, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, hypothesis testing for structural validity, measurement invariance assessments using the eHealth Literacy Scale, and Rasch analyses to determine the questionnaire's validity and reliability.

Results: This study underwent 4 stages of systematic development. The initial pool of items contained 25 items, 5 of which were eliminated after content validity testing; 19 items were subsequently retained through cognitive interviews. After an interitem correlation analysis, 2 more items were excluded, leaving 17 items for exploratory factor analysis. Finally, 2 items were excluded by Rasch analysis, resulting in a final version of the questionnaire containing 15 items. The total score range of the scale was 15-75, with higher scores indicating greater DHL competence. Results showed that principal component analysis confirmed the theoretical structure of the questionnaire (69.212% explained variance). The factor model fit was good with χ24=1.669; root mean square error of approximation=0.047; Tucker-Lewis Index=0.973; and Comparative Fit Index=0.977. In addition, hypothesis-testing construct validity with the eHealth Literacy Scale revealed a strong correlation (r=0.853). The internal consistency (Cronbach α) coefficient was 0.937. The retest reliability coefficient was 0.941. Rasch analysis demonstrated the item separation index was 3.81 (reliability 0.94) and the individual separation index was 2.91 (reliability 0.89).

Conclusions: The DHL Questionnaire for Stroke Survivors is a reliable and valid measure to assess DHL among stroke survivors in China.

卒中幸存者数字健康素养问卷的开发和验证:探索性顺序混合方法研究。
背景:在中国,对脑卒中患者数字健康素养(DHL)的研究有限。这主要是由于缺乏经过验证的工具,阻碍了我国数字化转型的准确性和可持续性。目的:本研究旨在开发和验证一种专门用于中国脑卒中幸存者的DHL量表。方法:我们采用顺序、探索性、混合方法为脑卒中幸存者编制DHL问卷。本研究纳入418例18岁及以上的中风患者。为了评估问卷的心理测量质量,我们将个体随机分为两组(子样本1:n=118,子样本2:n=300)。通过内部一致性分析、探索性和验证性因子分析、结构效度的假设检验、电子健康素养量表的测量不变性评估和Rasch分析来确定问卷的效度和信度。结果:本研究经历了4个系统的发展阶段。初始条目池包含25个条目,其中5个条目经过内容效度检验被剔除;随后通过认知访谈保留了19个项目。经项目间相关分析后,又排除了2个项目,剩下17个项目进行探索性因子分析。最后,通过Rasch分析剔除2个项目,最终得到15个项目的问卷。量表总分范围为15-75分,得分越高,DHL能力越强。结果表明,主成分分析证实了问卷的理论结构(解释方差为69.212%)。因子模型拟合良好,χ24=1.669;近似均方根误差=0.047;Tucker-Lewis指数= 0.973;比较拟合指数=0.977。此外,假设检验结构效度与电子健康素养量表显示强相关(r=0.853)。内部一致性(Cronbach α)系数为0.937。重测信度系数为0.941。Rasch分析显示,项目分离指数为3.81(信度0.94),个体分离指数为2.91(信度0.89)。结论:脑卒中幸存者DHL问卷是评估中国脑卒中幸存者DHL的一种可靠、有效的方法。
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
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
5.40%
发文量
654
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) is a highly respected publication in the field of health informatics and health services. With a founding date in 1999, JMIR has been a pioneer in the field for over two decades. As a leader in the industry, the journal focuses on digital health, data science, health informatics, and emerging technologies for health, medicine, and biomedical research. It is recognized as a top publication in these disciplines, ranking in the first quartile (Q1) by Impact Factor. Notably, JMIR holds the prestigious position of being ranked #1 on Google Scholar within the "Medical Informatics" discipline.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信