eHealth Literacy Instruments: Systematic Review of Measurement Properties

Abstract

Background The internet is now a major source of health information. With the growth of internet users, eHealth literacy has emerged as a new concept for digital health care. Therefore, health professionals need to consider the eHealth literacy of consumers when providing care utilizing digital health technologies. Objective This study aimed to identify currently available eHealth literacy instruments and evaluate their measurement properties to provide robust evidence to researchers and clinicians who are selecting an eHealth literacy instrument. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of self-reported eHealth literacy instruments by applying the updated COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) methodology. Results This study included 7 instruments from 41 articles describing 57 psychometric studies, as identified in 4 databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycInfo). No eHealth literacy instrument provided evidence for all measurement properties. The eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS) was originally developed with a single-factor structure under the definition of eHealth literacy before the rise of social media and the mobile web. That instrument was evaluated in 18 different languages and 26 countries, involving diverse populations. However, various other factor structures were exhibited: 7 types of two-factor structures, 3 types of three-factor structures, and 1 bifactor structure. The transactional eHealth literacy instrument (TeHLI) was developed to reflect the broader concept of eHealth literacy and was demonstrated to have a sufficient low-quality and very low-quality evidence for content validity (relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility) and sufficient high-quality evidence for structural validity and internal consistency; however, that instrument has rarely been evaluated. Conclusions The eHealth literacy scale was the most frequently investigated instrument. However, it is strongly recommended that the instrument's content be updated to reflect recent advancements in digital health technologies. In addition, the transactional eHealth literacy instrument needs improvements in content validity and further psychometric studies to increase the credibility of its synthesized evidence.

Remote video interface psychological assessment during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Experiences of consultants and clients

“…for the use of psychometric techniques, which is consistent with recent research carried out in this regard (De Luca et al, 2021;Lee et al, 2021). Both professionals and patients have reported a higher probability of distraction in this study.…”

eHealth Literacy in German Skin Cancer Patients

“…Especially in the industrialized world, the accessibility of the Internet through the high volume of cell phones and computer use has dramatically increased. Accordingly, over 5 billion people, representing nearly 65% of the global population, are Internet users [ 18 , 19 , 20 ]. Consequently, the Internet has removed many barriers to access health information [ 21 , 22 ].…”

“…The ability to understand, appraise, and apply health information is summarized in “eHealth literacy” [ 25 ], which consists of six different literacy skills: traditional, health, information, scientific, media, and computer literacy. One’s ability can be measured through the eHealth literacy scale [ 20 , 26 ]. In the last decade, the delivery of health-related information has shifted from a more traditional face-to-face exchange into a web-based mode due to the increasing use of digital devices.…”

Impact of Face-to-Face Teaching in Addition to Electronic Learning on Personal Protective Equipment Doffing Proficiency in Student Paramedics: Randomized Controlled Trial

“…Another important element that future studies should consider is the systematic assessment of computer literacy [ 61 , 62 ]. Indeed, even though we considered that computer literacy should be high in our population of Swiss student paramedics since the vast majority of them are young people living in a high-income country [ 63 ], the inconsistency between their actual skills and their ability to adequately rebuild the doffing sequence on a computer platform in prior studies [ 20 ] is intriguing.…”