Digital tools to promote or measure health literacy in children aged 3-5 years: scoping review.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Caron Molster, Jennifer Irvine, Amanda Devine, Ruth Wallace, Lennie Barblett, Leesa Costello
{"title":"Digital tools to promote or measure health literacy in children aged 3-5 years: scoping review.","authors":"Caron Molster, Jennifer Irvine, Amanda Devine, Ruth Wallace, Lennie Barblett, Leesa Costello","doi":"10.1093/heapro/daaf093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health literacy is a determinant of health that should be promoted and measured in early childhood. In the era of digitalization, this could involve digital platforms. However, little knowledge exists on the extent, range, and nature of literature on digital tools for promoting or measuring young children's health literacy. Addressing this gap, a scoping review was undertaken to explore what digital health literacy tools for children aged 3-5 years could be identified in the literature, what their key features were, how they were designed, whether children were codesigners, and whether the tools had been evaluated. Eligibility criteria included the literature being peer-reviewed, published between 2013 and 2024, and in English. Nine health and education databases were searched, and 19 articles met the inclusion criteria. Few of the reported tools covered the core dimensions of health literacy, underlying the need for digital tools that promote and/or measure young children's health-related knowledge and information-related skills. There was sparse description of design approaches, and little evidence children were engaged as active design partners, which is critical to address. Encouragingly, some evidence was usually provided to rationalize choices around specific digital technologies and/or design features, which could be further bolstered with evidence from the field of educational technology for children. There is strength in the literature's reporting of evaluation studies using well-respected design approaches; however, sample sizes were sometimes small, long-term follow-up did not often occur, and the influence of contextual factors on children's use of the tools was not explored.</p>","PeriodicalId":54256,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion International","volume":"40 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12214018/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daaf093","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Health literacy is a determinant of health that should be promoted and measured in early childhood. In the era of digitalization, this could involve digital platforms. However, little knowledge exists on the extent, range, and nature of literature on digital tools for promoting or measuring young children's health literacy. Addressing this gap, a scoping review was undertaken to explore what digital health literacy tools for children aged 3-5 years could be identified in the literature, what their key features were, how they were designed, whether children were codesigners, and whether the tools had been evaluated. Eligibility criteria included the literature being peer-reviewed, published between 2013 and 2024, and in English. Nine health and education databases were searched, and 19 articles met the inclusion criteria. Few of the reported tools covered the core dimensions of health literacy, underlying the need for digital tools that promote and/or measure young children's health-related knowledge and information-related skills. There was sparse description of design approaches, and little evidence children were engaged as active design partners, which is critical to address. Encouragingly, some evidence was usually provided to rationalize choices around specific digital technologies and/or design features, which could be further bolstered with evidence from the field of educational technology for children. There is strength in the literature's reporting of evaluation studies using well-respected design approaches; however, sample sizes were sometimes small, long-term follow-up did not often occur, and the influence of contextual factors on children's use of the tools was not explored.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

促进或衡量3-5岁儿童健康素养的数字工具:范围审查
卫生知识普及是健康的一个决定因素,应在幼儿期加以促进和衡量。在数字化时代,这可能涉及到数字平台。然而,关于促进或衡量幼儿健康素养的数字工具文献的程度、范围和性质的知识很少。为了解决这一差距,开展了范围审查,以探索在文献中可以确定哪些3-5岁儿童的数字健康素养工具,它们的主要特征是什么,它们是如何设计的,儿童是否是共同设计者,以及这些工具是否经过评估。入选标准包括:发表于2013年至2024年间、经过同行评审的英文文献。检索了9个卫生和教育数据库,有19篇文章符合纳入标准。报告的工具很少涵盖卫生素养的核心层面,因此需要数字工具来促进和(或)衡量幼儿的卫生相关知识和信息相关技能。关于设计方法的描述很少,很少有证据表明儿童作为积极的设计伙伴参与其中,这一点至关重要。令人鼓舞的是,通常会提供一些证据来合理化围绕特定数字技术和/或设计特征的选择,这可以通过儿童教育技术领域的证据进一步得到支持。文献中使用备受推崇的设计方法进行评估研究的报道是有优势的;然而,样本量有时很小,不经常进行长期随访,也没有探讨环境因素对儿童使用工具的影响。
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
Health Promotion International
Health Promotion International Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
146
期刊介绍: Health Promotion International contains refereed original articles, reviews, and debate articles on major themes and innovations in the health promotion field. In line with the remits of the series of global conferences on health promotion the journal expressly invites contributions from sectors beyond health. These may include education, employment, government, the media, industry, environmental agencies, and community networks. As the thought journal of the international health promotion movement we seek in particular theoretical, methodological and activist advances to the field. Thus, the journal provides a unique focal point for articles of high quality that describe not only theories and concepts, research projects and policy formulation, but also planned and spontaneous activities, organizational change, as well as social and environmental development.
×
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