Development of the Two-Stage Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Dentistry

Stucky, Brian D.; Lee, Jessica Y.; Lee, Shoou‐Yih Daniel; Rozier, R. Gary

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0528.2011.00619.x

Cited by 40 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Spanish TOFHLA has a reported reliability of alpha = 0.98 (17). Past research has indicated strong associations for English-speaking samples between the TOFHLA and REALD-99 (9) and a two-stage REALD (18), suggesting the appropriateness of TOFHLA for testing convergent validity for the dental word recognition test.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral Health Literacy Assessment: development of an oral health literacy instrument for Spanish speakers

Lee

Stucky

Rozier

et al. 2012

J Public Health Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To develop an oral health literacy instrument for Spanish-speaking adults, evaluate its psychometric properties, and determine its comparability to an English version. Methods The Oral Health Literacy Assessment in Spanish (OHLA-S) and English (OHLA-E) are designed with a word recognition section and a comprehension section using the multiple-choice format developed by an expert panel. Validation of OHLA-S and OHLA-E involved comparing the instrument with other health literacy instruments in a sample of 201 Spanish-speaking and 204 English-speaking subjects. Comparability between Spanish and English versions was assessed by testing for differential item functioning (DIF) using item response theory. Results We considered three OHLA-S scoring systems. Based on validity and reliability comparisons, 24 items were retained in the OHLA-S instrument. OHLA-S was correlated with another health literacy instrument, Spanish Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (P < 0.05). Significant correlations were also found between OHLA-S and years of schooling, oral health knowledge, overall health, and an understanding of written health-care materials (P < 0.05). OHLA-S displayed satisfactory reliability with a Cronbach Alpha of 0.70-0.80. DIF results suggested that OHLA-S and OHLA-E scores were not comparable at a given level of oral health literacy. Conclusions OHLA-S has acceptable reliability and validity. OHLA-S and OHLA-E are two different measurement tools and should not be used to compare oral health literacy between English- and Spanish-speaking populations.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oral Health Literacy Assessment: development of an oral health literacy instrument for Spanish speakers

Lee

Stucky

Rozier

et al. 2012

J Public Health Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the testing of TS-REALD, 19 % were found to have low oral health literacy [23], while the corresponding figure for OHLI was only 3 % [29]. However, the authors of OHLI state that their study population were young and well educated adults who were frequent users of dental care, which may explain the low percentage of people with lower health literacy levels.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…A revision of the REALD-30 has been published called the Two-Stage Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Dentistry (TS-REALD) [23]. The TS-REALD format contains a routing test, which serves to define the respondent's initial literacy level, and three stage-two tests, which measure the respondent's health literacy score.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of an instrument to assess oral health literacy in Norwegian adult dental patients

Stein

Pettersen

Bergdahl

et al. 2015

Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To develop and validate an interview instrument to assess oral health literacy in Norwegian adult dental patients. Materials and methods: The instrument, Adult Health Literacy Instrument for Dentistry (AHLID), was based on an OECD instrument used to assess general literacy in adults. 130 Norwegian adults (mean age 48 years; 57% women) participated. AHLID included a selection of oral health related printed texts that ranged from 1 to 5 with respect to difficulty. A questionnaire regarding socio-demographic variables and knowledge of risk factors for oral disease was used. DMFT, stimulated salivary flow rate and streptococcus mutans and lactobacillus in saliva was also examined. Results: The Cronbach's alpha values of AHLID were 0.98 for internal consistency reliability (p<0.01) and 0.81 for test-retest reliability (p<0.05). AHLID score 3 was most frequent while very few fulfilled the criteria for score 1 and 5. Linear multiple regression analysis showed that lactobacillus in saliva and knowledge of risk factors for periodontitis and caries were predictor variables of AHLID score. Conclusions: AHLID appears to be reliable and valid to assess oral health literacy in Norwegian adults, and suggests a method for country-specific health literacy instruments.

show abstract

“…Among the measures that used IRT or Rasch modeling, most (n=9) [11, 28–32, 36, 37] used data from estimated parameter values to strategically eliminate items that had low discrimination and items that targeted the same (difficulty) level of the underlying trait. When reviewing the range in trait levels across the items on measures where the b parameter estimate was reported, items ranged from b =‒6.34 to 2.06 [26].…”

Section: Limitations Of Validation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The state of the science of health literacy measurement

Nguyen

McCormack

2017

ISU

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Advancing health literacy (HL) research requires high-quality HL measures. This article provides an overview of the state of the science of HL measurement at the level of the individual: where the field started, currently is, and should be going. It is divided into eight key sections looking at (1) the history of HL measurement, (2) the relationship between HL definitions and measurement, (3) the HL conceptual domains most and least frequently measured, (4) the methods used to validate HL measures, (5) the characteristics of the participants in the measurement validation studies, (6) the practical considerations related to administering HL measures, (7) the advantages and disadvantages of using objective versus subjective HL measures, and (8) future directions for HL measurement.Based on the material presented in this article, the following conclusions can be drawn. First, there is an enormous proliferation of HL measures and this growth presents both opportunities and challenges for the field. Second, to move the field forward, there is an urgent need to better align HL measurement with definitions of HL. Third, some HL domains, such as numeracy, are measured more often than others, such as speaking and listening. Consequently, it is important to think about novel mechanisms to measure HL domains that are rarely measured. Fourth, HL measures are most often developed, validated, and refined using classical measurement approaches. However, strong empirical and practical rationales suggest making an assertive shift toward using modern measurement approaches. Fifth, most HL measures are not well validated for use in minority populations; consequently, future validation studies should be mindful of validation samples. Sixth, HL measures can be administered using multiple modes, most frequently via paper-and-pencil surveys. Identifying which mode of administration is most suitable requires reflecting on the underlying measurement purpose and the characteristics of the participants being measured. These considerations should also be made when deciding between a subjective versus objective HL measure.Cumulatively, this article provides tools to help readers select and use the most appropriate measures of HL for their needs. It also provides rationale and strategies for moving the science of HL measurement forward. Numerous scientific calls and proposals followed to develop and test HL measures in support of that recommendation [30]. Now, more than a decade later, over 150 HL measures exist, demonstrating a sweeping response to the scientific calls and reflecting tremendous productivity in this area [17,34,37]. This growth presents both opportunities and challenges for the field [26,42]. In one respect, each of

show abstract

Development of the Two-Stage Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Dentistry

Cited by 40 publications

References 16 publications

Oral Health Literacy Assessment: development of an oral health literacy instrument for Spanish speakers

Oral Health Literacy Assessment: development of an oral health literacy instrument for Spanish speakers

Development and validation of an instrument to assess oral health literacy in Norwegian adult dental patients

The state of the science of health literacy measurement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About