• Patient Educ Couns · Nov 2015

    Review

    Optimal health literacy measurement for the clinical setting: A systematic review.

    • Paul Duell, David Wright, Andre M N Renzaho, and Debi Bhattacharya.
    • University of East Anglia, School of Pharmacy, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, UK. Electronic address: p.duell@uea.ac.uk.
    • Patient Educ Couns. 2015 Nov 1; 98 (11): 1295-307.

    ObjectiveTo identify the optimal measurement instrument for assessing health literacy in a clinical setting.MethodsSeven databases were searched for studies evaluating health literacy instruments used with patients. Standardised systematic review methods were used by two reviewers independently assessing eligibility, extracting data and evaluating study quality. A narrative summary was produced.ResultsThe searches identified 626 articles of which 64 were eligible. Forty-three different health literacy instruments were identified. The quality of these instruments, based on their psychometric properties, varied considerably. The majority of health literacy instruments were found to only assess communicative health literacy of which the numeracy element was often not represented. The NVS instrument was found to be the most practical health literacy instrument to use.ConclusionThere is an urgent need to develop and psychometrically test a more encompassing health literacy instrument applicable in clinical settings as well as health promotion in general.Practice ImplicationsIn the absence of a more comprehensive health literacy instrument, the NVS is a practical instrument to quickly assess for health literacy in a clinical setting.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…