Measurement of Health Literacy Scale for Patients In Nursing Education
What Is eHEALS (eHealth Literacy Scale)
The eHealth Literacy Scale, which was designed by Norman and Skinner (2006b), is one of only a few tools available to determine a patient's ability to find and navigate electronic health information.
Measurement In eHealth Literacy Scale
It consists of eight items that collectively measure patients' comfort level and perceived ability to address their health problems by finding and using electronic health information. Questions center on the client's use of the Internet in relation to locating health information. Challenges to using electronic health information include not just the health message, but also the technology used to deliver that message.
This scale offers a way to assess whether a client would be a good candidate to engage in eHealth materials (Collins et al., 2012). Psychometric testing has demonstrated reliability of the tool in adolescents, college students, and middle/older age adults (Chung & Nahm, 2015; Nguyen et al., 2016; Norman & Skinner, 2006b). See Exhibit A-2 in Appendix A for the scale.
What Is LAD (Literacy Assessment for Diabetes)
The LAD was specifically developed in 2001 to measure word recognition in adult patients with diabetes. This reading skills test, compared with WRAT3 (third version) and REALM, was found to have strong reliability and validity (Nath et al., 2001).
Details of Literacy Assessment for Diabetes
It consists of three word lists presented in ascending order of difficulty. Many terms are at the 4th-grade reading level, but the remaining words range from 6th- through 16th-grade levels. The LAD can be administered in 3 minutes or less. It was tested on a group of 200 people at a primary care clinic, a senior center, and three prisons. The subjects ranged in age from 20 to 85 years (mean age = 43.5).
This standardized test was modeled after REALM but emphasizes common words used when teaching self-care management of diabetes. The LAD instrument is copyrighted but is available with permission from Charlotte Nath (nathcharlotte@gmail. com) at https://healthliteracy.bu.edu/76/104/122 /mobile/documents/lad.
What Is SAM (Instrument for Suitability Assessment of Materials)
In addition to using formulas and tests to measure readability, comprehension, and reading skills, Doak et al. (1996), in conjunction with the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, designed a tool to rapidly and systematically assess the suitability of instructional materials for a given population of learners. Ideally, instructional tools should be evaluated with a sample of the intended audience, but limited time and resources may preclude such an approach.
In response to this dilemma, these literacy experts developed the Suitability Assessment of Materials instrument. Not only can the SAM tool be used with print material and illustrations, but it also has been applied to videotaped and audio taped instructions.
Implementations of Suitability Assessment of Materials
Although not designed to specifically
measure health literacy or evaluate only health related materials, it can be a
very useful tool in determining the effectiveness of instructional materials
for diverse patient populations in the healthcare arena (Helitzer, Hollis,
Cotner, & Oestreicher, 2009; Lee, Kang, Kim, Woo, & Kim, 2011; Rhee,
Von Feldt, Schumacher, & Merkel, 2013; Vallance et al., 2008; Weintraub,
Maliski, Fink, Choe, & Litwin, 2004).
Results of Suitability Assessment of Materials
The SAM instrument yields a numerical (percentage) score, with materials tested falling into one of three categories: superior (70-100%), adequate (40-69%), or not suitable (0-39%). The application of this tool can identify specific deficiencies in instructional materials that reduce their suitability. The SAM instrument includes 22 factors to assess the content, literacy demand, graphics, layout and typography. learning stimulation and motivation, and cultural appropriateness of instructional materials being developed or already in use (Doak & Doak, 2010).
The maximum score possible
is 44 points (equals 100%). If one or more SAM factors do not apply to the material
being tested, the test administrator should subtract two points each for every
not applicable factor. For example, if the material tests at 36 but two factors
did not apply, the maximum possible score would be 40; in this case, the score
would be 36/40 90% (Doak et al., 1996). See Exhibit A-3 in Appendix A for the
SAM scoring sheet.
Give your opinion if have any.