Health literacy survey in health science students versus population-based sample of residents in Singapore.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Nicole W Chng, Geralyn J Kwek, Kenrick Y Cheong, Syed Munauwwar B Syed Mahmud, Vinita L Sheri, Debbie S Wong, Meredith T Yeung
{"title":"Health literacy survey in health science students versus population-based sample of residents in Singapore.","authors":"Nicole W Chng, Geralyn J Kwek, Kenrick Y Cheong, Syed Munauwwar B Syed Mahmud, Vinita L Sheri, Debbie S Wong, Meredith T Yeung","doi":"10.1177/17579759251337767","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health literacy encompasses the social and cognitive skills required to access, comprehend, and use health information to maintain or improve health. This is the first study to assess the health literacy levels of health science students and adult residents in Singapore using the health literacy questionnaire (HLQ) and compare their levels.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Singapore from December 2019 to January 2023. The 44-item HLQ was administered to (1) entry-level health science students in a local university and (2) adult residents aged 18 and 80 who could understand and respond in English, Mandarin, or Malay. Variables such as demographic data, gender, age, language(s) spoken, education levels, and employment status were collected. HLQ scores were analysed using descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U-test, and rank-biserial coefficient.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and eighty-two surveys were returned (students, <i>n</i> = 112; residents, <i>n</i> = 170). Overall, the health science students, particularly the female subgroup, obtained higher mean HLQ scores than the residents. Conversely, male residents scored better in 5 of the 9 subscales. Most comparisons lack statistical significance despite the noticeable effect sizes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Health science students have better health literacy when navigating health information. However, the lack of significant difference between groups for most HLQ scales, especially when comparing within age groups, indicated that the health science students needed to be more confident in their health literacy skills.</p>","PeriodicalId":46805,"journal":{"name":"Global Health Promotion","volume":" ","pages":"17579759251337767"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Health Promotion","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17579759251337767","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Health literacy encompasses the social and cognitive skills required to access, comprehend, and use health information to maintain or improve health. This is the first study to assess the health literacy levels of health science students and adult residents in Singapore using the health literacy questionnaire (HLQ) and compare their levels.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Singapore from December 2019 to January 2023. The 44-item HLQ was administered to (1) entry-level health science students in a local university and (2) adult residents aged 18 and 80 who could understand and respond in English, Mandarin, or Malay. Variables such as demographic data, gender, age, language(s) spoken, education levels, and employment status were collected. HLQ scores were analysed using descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U-test, and rank-biserial coefficient.

Results: Two hundred and eighty-two surveys were returned (students, n = 112; residents, n = 170). Overall, the health science students, particularly the female subgroup, obtained higher mean HLQ scores than the residents. Conversely, male residents scored better in 5 of the 9 subscales. Most comparisons lack statistical significance despite the noticeable effect sizes.

Conclusions: Health science students have better health literacy when navigating health information. However, the lack of significant difference between groups for most HLQ scales, especially when comparing within age groups, indicated that the health science students needed to be more confident in their health literacy skills.

新加坡卫生科学专业学生健康素养调查与基于人群的居民样本。
背景:健康素养包括获取、理解和使用健康信息以维持或改善健康所需的社会和认知技能。这是第一个使用健康素养问卷(HLQ)评估新加坡健康科学学生和成年居民健康素养水平并比较其水平的研究。方法:2019年12月至2023年1月在新加坡进行横断面调查。有44个项目的HLQ被分配给(1)当地大学的初级卫生科学学生和(2)年龄在18岁和80岁之间的成年居民,他们可以理解并回答英语、普通话或马来语。收集了人口统计数据、性别、年龄、语言、教育水平和就业状况等变量。采用描述性统计、Mann-Whitney u检验和秩-双列系数对HLQ分数进行分析。结果:共回收问卷282份(学生,n = 112;居民,n = 170)。总体而言,健康科学学生,特别是女性亚组的平均HLQ得分高于居民。相反,男性居民在9个子量表中的5个得分更高。大多数比较缺乏统计意义,尽管显著的效应大小。结论:健康理科生在浏览健康信息时具有较好的健康素养。然而,大多数HLQ量表在组间缺乏显著差异,特别是在年龄组内比较时,表明健康科学学生需要对自己的健康素养技能更有信心。
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
Global Health Promotion
Global Health Promotion PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
71
期刊介绍: The journal aims to: ·publish academic content and commentaries of practical importance; ·provide an international and interdisciplinary forum for the dissemination and exchange of health promotion, health education and public health theory, research findings, practice and reviews; ·publish articles which ensure wide geographical coverage and are of general interest to an international readership; ·provide fair, supportive, efficient and high quality peer review and editorial handling of all submissions.
×
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