Factor structure of self-reported health literacy scales: a large-scale cross-sectional study among Japanese-speaking adults.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Chihiro Moriishi, Keisuke Takano, Takeyuki Oba, Naoki Konishi, Kentaro Katahira, Kenta Kimura
{"title":"Factor structure of self-reported health literacy scales: a large-scale cross-sectional study among Japanese-speaking adults.","authors":"Chihiro Moriishi, Keisuke Takano, Takeyuki Oba, Naoki Konishi, Kentaro Katahira, Kenta Kimura","doi":"10.1093/heapro/daaf135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The importance of health literacy has become widely recognized in the fields of psychology and public health over past decades, during which more than 100 health-literacy scales have been developed. These scales typically have unique targets (or subscales), leading to an enormous number of factors proposed across scales. However, conceptual overlaps and redundancy are left unresolved. This study therefore explored the factor structure of 219 items extracted from 11 existing scales assessing subjective health literacy, each of which was administered to Japanese-speaking online panels (N = 16 097; 7722 women; mean age = 54.9 years). Exploratory factor analysis suggested seven factors, three of which represented general health literacy and the other four pertained to social health literacy, mental health literacy, digital literacy, and numeracy. The three factors of general health literacy cover slightly different constructs (e.g. ability vs. motivation to find health information) and may reflect differences in the rating scales (easy to difficult vs. agree to disagree). Confirmatory factor analysis on independent testing data supported this seven-factor structure with selected items. Each factor showed, overall, small correlations with mental and physical health and healthy lifestyles, which leaves the discriminant validity open for future research. These results suggest that subjective health literacy scales can be reduced to a smaller, more parsimonious number of factors. Some of the administered scales were combined as a single latent factor, whereas scales targeting specific aspects (social, mental, digital, and numeracy) were recognized as independent factors. Recommendations for assessment and battery designs are discussed.</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":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daaf135","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

The importance of health literacy has become widely recognized in the fields of psychology and public health over past decades, during which more than 100 health-literacy scales have been developed. These scales typically have unique targets (or subscales), leading to an enormous number of factors proposed across scales. However, conceptual overlaps and redundancy are left unresolved. This study therefore explored the factor structure of 219 items extracted from 11 existing scales assessing subjective health literacy, each of which was administered to Japanese-speaking online panels (N = 16 097; 7722 women; mean age = 54.9 years). Exploratory factor analysis suggested seven factors, three of which represented general health literacy and the other four pertained to social health literacy, mental health literacy, digital literacy, and numeracy. The three factors of general health literacy cover slightly different constructs (e.g. ability vs. motivation to find health information) and may reflect differences in the rating scales (easy to difficult vs. agree to disagree). Confirmatory factor analysis on independent testing data supported this seven-factor structure with selected items. Each factor showed, overall, small correlations with mental and physical health and healthy lifestyles, which leaves the discriminant validity open for future research. These results suggest that subjective health literacy scales can be reduced to a smaller, more parsimonious number of factors. Some of the administered scales were combined as a single latent factor, whereas scales targeting specific aspects (social, mental, digital, and numeracy) were recognized as independent factors. Recommendations for assessment and battery designs are discussed.

自我报告健康素养量表的因素结构:在日语成年人中的大规模横断面研究。
在过去的几十年里,健康素养的重要性在心理学和公共卫生领域得到了广泛的认识,在此期间,已经开发了100多个健康素养量表。这些量表通常有独特的目标(或子量表),导致跨量表提出了大量的因素。然而,概念上的重叠和冗余仍未得到解决。因此,本研究探讨了从现有的11个评估主观健康素养的量表中提取的219个项目的因素结构,每个项目都由讲日语的在线小组进行管理(N = 16097;7722名女性;平均年龄54.9岁)。探索性因素分析提出了7个因素,其中3个代表一般健康素养,另外4个涉及社会健康素养、心理健康素养、数字素养和计算能力。一般健康素养的三个因素涵盖了略有不同的结构(例如,能力与寻找健康信息的动机),并可能反映了评分量表的差异(容易到困难vs.同意不同意)。对独立测试数据的验证性因子分析支持这种七因素结构与选定的项目。总的来说,每个因素与身心健康和健康的生活方式之间的相关性都很小,这为未来的研究留下了判别有效性的空间。这些结果表明,主观健康素养量表可以减少到更小,更节俭的因素数量。一些被管理的量表被合并为一个单一的潜在因素,而针对特定方面(社会、心理、数字和计算)的量表被认为是独立的因素。讨论了评估和电池设计的建议。
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