The Measurements and an Elaborated Understanding of Chinese eHealth Literacy (C-eHEALS) in Chronic Patients in China

Abstract

The rapid rise of Internet-based technologies to disseminate health information and services has been shown to enhance online health information acquisition. A Chinese version of the electronic health literacy scale (C-eHEALS) was developed to measure patients’ combined knowledge and perceived skills at finding and applying electronic health information to health problems. A valid sample of 352 interviewees responded to the online questionnaire, and their responses were analyzed. The C-eHEALS, by showing high internal consistency and predictive validity, is an effective screening tool for detecting levels of health literacy in clinical settings. Individuals’ sociodemographic status, perceived health status, and level of health literacy were identified for describing technology users’ characteristics. A strong association between eHealth literacy level, media information use, and computer literacy was found. The emphasis of face-to-face inquiry for obtaining health information was important in the low eHealth literacy group while Internet-based technologies crucially affected decision-making skills in the high eHealth literacy group. This information is timely because it implies that health care providers can use the C-eHEALS to screen eHealth literacy skills and empower patients with chronic diseases with online resources.

Psychometric Properties of the Norwegian Version of the Electronic Health Literacy Scale (eHEALS) Among Patients After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Cross-Sectional Validation Study

“…Assessing eHealth literacy to identify skill gaps makes it possible to better assist those with low comfort levels in taking advantage of the potential benefit that eHealth can offer, and can empower patients to fully participate in health-related decision making [ 4 ]. To assess these benefits, the identification and validation of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) assessing patients’ perceived eHealth literacy skills are therefore crucial to developing efficient patient-centered eHealth information strategies in the future [ 5 ].…”

“…The eHEALS has been adapted to different languages in Asia [ 5 , 10 - 13 ] and Europe [ 14 - 18 ]. Furthermore, the psychometrics properties have been evaluated in different populations such as in students [ 4 , 12 , 15 , 19 , 20 ], adults [ 9 , 11 , 16 - 18 , 21 ], and patients with chronic diseases [ 5 , 14 , 22 , 23 ], as well as in different cultures in Australia [ 9 , 24 ] and North America [ 9 , 17 , 20 - 22 ]. The internal consistency reliability coefficient was shown to be acceptable (ranging from .80 to .90) in the majority of the linguistic versions of the eHEALS [ 4 , 11 - 13 , 15 - 19 , 23 ], indicating a reliable scale.…”

“…The internal consistency reliability coefficient was shown to be acceptable (ranging from .80 to .90) in the majority of the linguistic versions of the eHEALS [ 4 , 11 - 13 , 15 - 19 , 23 ], indicating a reliable scale. According to construct validity, the majority of the studies supported a 1-factor model [ 5 , 10 , 12 - 14 , 16 , 22 , 23 , 25 ] recommended by the original scale [ 4 ], whereas a few other studies have recommended a 2-factor [ 11 , 15 , 18 ] or 3-factor [ 9 , 21 , 24 ] model. However, all of these studies varied contextually when evaluating the dimensions of the eHEALS construct.…”

“…Therefore, in this current study, hypotheses were tested and evaluated against existing knowledge. For instance, a lower eHEALS score has been demonstrated among people with chronic illnesses [ 3 ], and differences in eHEALS scores according to age and education have been reported [ 5 , 14 ]. Significant relationships between the eHEALS score and physical and mental health composites among patients with heart failure have been described [ 23 ].…”

Psychometric validation of Swedish and Arabic versions of two health literacy questionnaires, eHEALS and HLS-EU-Q16, for use in a Swedish context: a study protocol

“…The eHEALS is available in a range of languages11 12 27–34 and the English version has been successfully administered digitally via telephone 35. Tests of the validity of eHEALS indicates that it is a reliable and valid instrument12 28 36–38 and also that the validity of it requires further investigation 11.…”