Validación de la escala eHealth Literacy (eHEALS) en población universitaria española

Pérez, Gema Paramio; Almagro, Bartolomé J.; Gómez, Ángel Hernándo; Aguaded, Ignácio

doi:10.4321/s1135-57272015000300010

Cited by 91 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to our findings, previous studies using classical test theory and item response theory (in a student population, healthy adults using the internet and patients with rheumatic disease) have supported unidimensionality of the eHEALS [17,34]. In our analysis, we identified two constructs, or concepts, of eHealth literacy: (1) items 1–5 (around knowledge about resources) and (2) items 6–8 (around evaluation of resources).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Prior studies using factor analysis or principal component analysis (PCA) and item response theory (IRT) have found the eHEALS to be internally consistent (Crohnbach α: 0.87 to 0.94) with modest to good stability [7,16,17,34] and have supported the construct validity of the scale. The high internal consistency found in this study (PSI: 0.90) further supports these findings [7,16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The psychometric properties of both the eHEALS and the HLQ have been examined using classical test theory and item response theory methods. Prior studies using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) have demonstrated the eHEALS to be a valid and reliable scale [16,17]. More recent item response theory studies have confirmed these findings [18,19] and demonstrated that the scale measures the same underlying concept or construct.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Examination of an eHealth literacy scale and a health literacy scale in a population with moderate to high cardiovascular risk: Rasch analyses

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionElectronic health (eHealth) strategies are evolving making it important to have valid scales to assess eHealth and health literacy. Item response theory methods, such as the Rasch measurement model, are increasingly used for the psychometric evaluation of scales. This paper aims to examine the internal construct validity of an eHealth and health literacy scale using Rasch analysis in a population with moderate to high cardiovascular disease risk.MethodsThe first 397 participants of the CONNECT study completed the electronic health Literacy Scale (eHEALS) and the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). Overall Rasch model fit as well as five key psychometric properties were analysed: unidimensionality, response thresholds, targeting, differential item functioning and internal consistency.ResultsThe eHEALS had good overall model fit (χ2 = 54.8, p = 0.06), ordered response thresholds, reasonable targeting and good internal consistency (person separation index (PSI) 0.90). It did, however, appear to measure two constructs of eHealth literacy. The HLQ subscales (except subscale 5) did not fit the Rasch model (χ2: 18.18–60.60, p: 0.00–0.58) and had suboptimal targeting for most subscales. Subscales 6 to 9 displayed disordered thresholds indicating participants had difficulty distinguishing between response options. All subscales did, nonetheless, demonstrate moderate to good internal consistency (PSI: 0.62–0.82).ConclusionRasch analyses demonstrated that the eHEALS has good measures of internal construct validity although it appears to capture different aspects of eHealth literacy (e.g. using eHealth and understanding eHealth). Whilst further studies are required to confirm this finding, it may be necessary for these constructs of the eHEALS to be scored separately. The nine HLQ subscales were shown to measure a single construct of health literacy. However, participants’ scores may not represent their actual level of ability, as distinction between response categories was unclear for the last four subscales. Reducing the response categories of these subscales may improve the ability of the HLQ to distinguish between different levels of health literacy.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Examination of an eHealth literacy scale and a health literacy scale in a population with moderate to high cardiovascular risk: Rasch analyses

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the limitations in previous research administering the eHEALS in chronic disease populations, the purpose of this study was to explore the one-factor structure and reliability of eHEALS scores among a diverse sample of US chronic disease patients who report using the Internet to find health information. This study goes beyond classical measurement approaches [21,22] by applying a higher-level Item Response Theory (IRT) technique to explore the reliability and internal structure of responses to eHEALS items.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

eHealth literacy in chronic disease patients: An item response theory analysis of the eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS)

Paige

Krieger

Stellefson

et al. 2017

Patient Education and Counseling

123

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Chronic disease patients are affected by low computer and health literacy, which negatively affects their ability to benefit from access to online health information. Objective To estimate reliability and confirm model specifications for eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) scores among chronic disease patients using Classical Test (CTT) and Item Response Theory techniques. Methods A stratified sample of Black/African American (N = 341) and Caucasian (N = 343) adults with chronic disease completed an online survey including the eHEALS. Item discrimination was explored using bi-variate correlations and Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency. A categorical confirmatory factor analysis tested a one-factor structure of eHEALS scores. Item characteristic curves, in-fit/outfit statistics, omega coefficient, and item reliability and separation estimates were computed. Results A 1-factor structure of eHEALS was confirmed by statistically significant standardized item loadings, acceptable model fit indices (CFI/TLI > 0.90), and 70% variance explained by the model. Item response categories increased with higher theta levels, and there was evidence of acceptable reliability (ω = 0.94; item reliability = 89; item separation = 8.54). Conclusion eHEALS scores are a valid and reliable measure of self-reported eHealth literacy among Internet-using chronic disease patients. Practice implications Providers can use eHEALS to help identify patients’ eHealth literacy skills.

show abstract

“…Across these studies, no consistent association of eHEALS scores with the personal characteristics of the respondents, such as gender, education, or age was found. eHEALS has so far been translated and validated in Dutch [11], Japanese [12], Chinese [13], German [14], Spanish [15], Italian [16], Iranian [17], and Hebrew [10,18]. All the linguistic versions of the scale presented high internal consistency measured via Cronbach alpha.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Psychometric Analysis of the Italian Version of the eHealth Literacy Scale Using Item Response and Classical Test Theory Methods

Diviani¹,

Dima²,

Schulz³

2017

J Med Internet Res

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) is a tool to assess consumers’ comfort and skills in using information technologies for health. Although evidence exists of reliability and construct validity of the scale, less agreement exists on structural validity.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of the eHealth Literacy Scale (I-eHEALS) in a community sample with a focus on its structural validity, by applying psychometric techniques that account for item difficulty.MethodsTwo Web-based surveys were conducted among a total of 296 people living in the Italian-speaking region of Switzerland (Ticino). After examining the latent variables underlying the observed variables of the Italian scale via principal component analysis (PCA), fit indices for two alternative models were calculated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The scale structure was examined via parametric and nonparametric item response theory (IRT) analyses accounting for differences between items regarding the proportion of answers indicating high ability. Convergent validity was assessed by correlations with theoretically related constructs.ResultsCFA showed a suboptimal model fit for both models. IRT analyses confirmed all items measure a single dimension as intended. Reliability and construct validity of the final scale were also confirmed. The contrasting results of factor analysis (FA) and IRT analyses highlight the importance of considering differences in item difficulty when examining health literacy scales.ConclusionsThe findings support the reliability and validity of the translated scale and its use for assessing Italian-speaking consumers’ eHealth literacy.

show abstract

Validación de la escala eHealth Literacy (eHEALS) en población universitaria española

Abstract: The spanish version of the eHEALS tested in this work has shown to be a valid and reliable scale to measure eHealth competence in university students.

Cited by 91 publications

References 23 publications

Examination of an eHealth literacy scale and a health literacy scale in a population with moderate to high cardiovascular risk: Rasch analyses

Examination of an eHealth literacy scale and a health literacy scale in a population with moderate to high cardiovascular risk: Rasch analyses

eHealth literacy in chronic disease patients: An item response theory analysis of the eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS)

A Psychometric Analysis of the Italian Version of the eHealth Literacy Scale Using Item Response and Classical Test Theory Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About