No abstract

Health literacy is an important construct in population health and healthcare requiring rigorous measurement. The Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ), with nine scales, measures a broad perception of health literacy. This study aimed to adapt the HLQ to the Danish setting, and to examine the factor structure, homogeneity, reliability and discriminant validity. The HLQ was adapted using forward–backward translation, consensus conference and cognitive interviews (n = 15). Psychometric properties were examined based on data collected by face-to-face interview (n = 481). Tests included difficulty level, composite scale reliability and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Cognitive testing revealed that only minor re-wording was required. The easiest scale to respond to positively was ‘Social support for health’, and the hardest were ‘Navigating the healthcare system’ and ‘Appraisal of health information’. CFA of the individual scales showed acceptably high loadings (range 0.49–0.93). CFA fit statistics after including correlated residuals were good for seven scales, acceptable for one. Composite reliability and Cronbach’s α were >0.8 for all but one scale. A nine-factor CFA model was fitted to items with no cross-loadings or correlated residuals allowed. Given this restricted model, the fit was satisfactory. The HLQ appears robust for its intended application of assessing health literacy in a range of settings. Further work is required to demonstrate sensitivity to measure changes.

BackgroundeHealth systems and applications are increasingly focused on supporting consumers to directly engage with and use health care services. Involving end users in the design of these systems is critical to ensure a generation of usable and effective eHealth products and systems. Often the end users engaged for these participatory design processes are not actual representatives of the general population, and developers may have limited understanding about how well they might represent the full range of intended users of the eHealth products. As a consequence, resulting information technology (IT) designs may not accommodate the needs, skills, cognitive capacities, and/or contexts of use of the intended broader population of health consumers. This may result in challenges for consumers who use the health IT systems, and could lead to limitations in adoption if the diversity of user attributes has not been adequately considered by health IT designers.ObjectiveThe objective of this paper is to propose how users’ needs and competences can be taken into account when designing new information and communications technology solutions in health care by expanding the user-task-context matrix model with the domains of a new concept of eHealth literacy.MethodsThis approach expands an existing method for supporting health IT system development, which advocates use of a three-dimensional user-task-context matrix to comprehensively identify the users of health IT systems, and what their needs and requirements are under differing contexts of use. The extension of this model involved including knowledge about users’ competences within the seven domains of eHealth literacy, which had been identified based on systematic engagement with computer scientists, academics, health professionals, and patients recruited from various patient organizations and primary care. A concept map was constructed based on a structured brainstorm procedure, card sorting, and computational analysis.ResultsThe new eHealth literacy concept (based on 7 domains) was incorporated as a key factor in expanding the user-task-context matrix to describe and qualify user requirements and understanding related to eHealth literacy. This resulted in an expanded framework and a five-step process, which can support health IT designers in understanding and more accurately addressing end-users’ needs, capabilities, and contexts to improve effectiveness and broader applicability of consumer-focused health IT systems. It is anticipated that the framework will also be useful for policy makers involved in the planning, procuring, and funding of eHealth infrastructure, applications, and services.ConclusionsDeveloping effective eHealth products requires complete understanding of the end-users’ needs from multiple perspectives. In this paper, we have proposed and detailed a framework for modeling users’ needs for designing eHealth systems that merges prior work in development of a user-task-context matrix with the emerging area of eHealth literacy. This framework is intende...

BackgroundTo achieve full potential in user-oriented eHealth projects, we need to ensure a match between the eHealth technology and the user’s eHealth literacy, described as knowledge and skills. However, there is a lack of multifaceted eHealth literacy assessment tools suitable for screening purposes.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to develop and validate an eHealth literacy assessment toolkit (eHLA) that assesses individuals’ health literacy and digital literacy using a mix of existing and newly developed scales.MethodsFrom 2011 to 2015, scales were continuously tested and developed in an iterative process, which led to 7 tools being included in the validation study. The eHLA validation version consisted of 4 health-related tools (tool 1: “functional health literacy,” tool 2: “health literacy self-assessment,” tool 3: “familiarity with health and health care,” and tool 4: “knowledge of health and disease”) and 3 digitally-related tools (tool 5: “technology familiarity,” tool 6: “technology confidence,” and tool 7: “incentives for engaging with technology”) that were tested in 475 respondents from a general population sample and an outpatient clinic. Statistical analyses examined floor and ceiling effects, interitem correlations, item-total correlations, and Cronbach coefficient alpha (CCA). Rasch models (RM) examined the fit of data. Tools were reduced in items to secure robust tools fit for screening purposes. Reductions were made based on psychometrics, face validity, and content validity.ResultsTool 1 was not reduced in items; it consequently consists of 10 items. The overall fit to the RM was acceptable (Anderson conditional likelihood ratio, CLR=10.8; df=9; P=.29), and CCA was .67. Tool 2 was reduced from 20 to 9 items. The overall fit to a log-linear RM was acceptable (Anderson CLR=78.4, df=45, P=.002), and CCA was .85. Tool 3 was reduced from 23 to 5 items. The final version showed excellent fit to a log-linear RM (Anderson CLR=47.7, df=40, P=.19), and CCA was .90. Tool 4 was reduced from 12 to 6 items. The fit to a log-linear RM was acceptable (Anderson CLR=42.1, df=18, P=.001), and CCA was .59. Tool 5 was reduced from 20 to 6 items. The fit to the RM was acceptable (Anderson CLR=30.3, df=17, P=.02), and CCA was .94. Tool 6 was reduced from 5 to 4 items. The fit to a log-linear RM taking local dependency (LD) into account was acceptable (Anderson CLR=26.1, df=21, P=.20), and CCA was .91. Tool 7 was reduced from 6 to 4 items. The fit to a log-linear RM taking LD and differential item functioning into account was acceptable (Anderson CLR=23.0, df=29, P=.78), and CCA was .90.ConclusionsThe eHLA consists of 7 short, robust scales that assess individual’s knowledge and skills related to digital literacy and health literacy.

In current e-health research and development there is a need for a broader understanding of the capabilities and resources required for individuals to use and benefit from e-health services, i.e. their e-health literacy. The aim of this study was to develop a new conceptualisation of e-health literacy with consideration of the experiences of a wide range of stakeholders and in alignment with current technologies. Concept mapping was used to generate a comprehensive and grounded model of e-health literacy. Concept mapping workshop participants included patients, health professionals and medical informatics experts. Eight workshops, carried out in Denmark and United Kingdom, generated 450 statements, separated into 128 clusters. Through an inductive structured analysis, seven domains were identified: 1. Ability to process information, 2. Engagement in own health, 3. Ability to engage actively with digital services, 4. Feeling safe and in control, 5. Motivation to engage with digital services, 6. Having access to systems that work, and 7. Digital services that suit individual needs. These empirically derived domains form an e-health literacy framework (eHLF) and provide new insights into the user’s ability to understand, access and use e-health technologies. The eHLF offers a framework for evaluating an individual’s or a population’s capacity to understand, use and benefit from technology to promote and maintain their health. Such a framework also provides a potential checklist for the development and improvement of e-health services.

Purpose: Lipid-lowering medications are often prescribed to decrease the risk of micro-and macro-cardiovascular complications related to dyslipidaemia. Despite widespread prescription of lipid-lowering drugs, including statins, adherence to therapy is a challenge worldwide. This systematic review of reviews aimed to conduct a critical appraisal and synthesis of review findings and to provide an overview of the factors that were found to affect adherence to lipid-lowering drugs, focusing on statins, in the reviews. Patients and Methods: A systematic review methodology was used. MEDLINE, Embase, and Epistemonikos databases were searched for relevant publications. AMSTAR 2 criteria were used to assess the quality of the selected publications. Results: From a total of 763 screened publications, 9 met all inclusion criteria and were included in this synthesis. Several factors were identified as being associated with adherence to lipid-lowering agents. Among them, high socio-economic and educational position, and middle age had a positive effect on adherence to lipid-lowering agents. Contrary, female sex, older and younger age, non-white race, low socio-economic position, high co-payments, being a new statin user, comorbidities, side effects, regimen complexity, type and intensity of statin dose, smoking, alcohol consumption, imperceptible benefits, and medical distrust contributed to non-adherence. The overall quality of the included reviews was considered critically low to moderate. Conclusion: This review of reviews has evaluated the impact of factors on adherence statins. Further research related to modifiable predictors for non-adherence is warranted.

Background: New, complex, and expensive therapies targeting Interleukin-5 (IL-5) to treat severe eosinophilic asthma are emerging.Objective: To assess efficacy, adverse events, and inter-drug comparison of mepolizumab and reslizumab for treating severe eosinophilic asthma.Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis on randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trials elucidating two critical (exacerbation rate and oral corticosteroid (OCS) use) and six important clinical outcomes on the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab and reslizumab.Results: Five studies (N = 2197) contributed with data for exacerbation rate, showing a reduction of 53% (95% CI 46; 59) in favour of anti-IL-5, corresponding to –0.94 annual exacerbations (95% CI –1.08;–0.82), thus exceeding the predefined minimal clinical important difference (MCID) of 25% reduction of the estimated ≥2 annual exacerbations. Quality of evidence was considered moderate, with low heterogeneity in study findings (I2 = 0%). One study (N = 135) contributed with data on percentage of patients experiencing ≥50% reduction inoral corticosteroid treatment, showing an effect of 20% (95% CI 2.3;47) in favour of anti-IL-5 treatment (mepolizumab), thus exceeding the predefined MCID of 10%. Quality of evidence was considered low.Compared to placebo, anti-IL-5 showed significant improvements in lung function, asthma control, and asthma-related quality of life, but below the MCIDs. No differences were observed for serious adverse events and number of patients, who dropped out. No studies evaluating sickleave or head-to-head comparisons were identified. By indirect comparison, we found no significant difference between mepolizumab and reslizumab in any ofthe predefined clinical outcomes. OCS treatment reduction could not be compared due to lack of reslizumab studies investigating this outcome.Conclusions: Mepolizumab and reslizumab provide significant and clinically relevant improvements in exacerbation rate and OCS reduction. Indirect, inter-study comparisons revealed no differences between the anti-IL-5 drugs in efficacy or safety measures.

Summary In parallel with an increased focus on climate changes and carbon footprint, the interest in plant‐based diets and its potential health effects have increased over the past decade. The objective of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to examine the effect of vegan diets (≥12 weeks) on cardiometabolic risk factors in people with overweight or type 2 diabetes. We identified 11 trials (796 participants). In comparison with control diets, vegan diets reduced body weight (−4.1 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) −5.9 to −2.4, p < 0.001), body mass index (BMI) (−1.38 kg/m2, 95% CI −1.96 to −0.80, p < 0.001), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (−0.18% points, 95% CI −0.29 to −0.07, p = 0.002), total cholesterol (−0.30 mmol/L, 95% CI −0.52 to −0.08, p = 0.007), and low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (−0.24 mmol/L, 95% CI −0.40 to −0.07, p = 0.005). We identified no effect on blood pressure, high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides. We found that adhering to vegan diets for at least 12 weeks may be effective in individuals with overweight or type 2 diabetes to induce a meaningful decrease in body weight and improve glycemia. Some of this effect may be contributed to differences in the macronutrient composition and energy intake in the vegan versus control diets. Therefore, more research is needed regarding vegan diets and cardiometabolic health.