Evidence based on test content, response process and internal structure: Validity testing of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ) in Australian community health settings Part 2 (Preprint)

Author:

Cheng ChristinaORCID,Elsworth Gerald RORCID,Osborne Richard HORCID

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Digital technologies have changed how we manage our health and eHealth literacy is needed to engage with health technologies. Any eHealth strategy would be ineffective if the eHealth literacy needs of users are not addressed. Hence, a robust measure of eHealth literacy is essential for understanding these needs. Based on the eHealth Literacy Framework (eHLF) which identified 7 dimensions of eHealth literacy, the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ) was developed. The tool has demonstrated robust psychometric properties in the Danish setting, but validity testing should be an ongoing and accumulative process.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate validity evidence based on test content, response process and internal structure of the eHLQ in the Australian community health setting.

METHODS

A mixed-method approach was used with cognitive interviewing conducted to examine evidence on test content and response process while a cross-sectional survey was undertaken for evidence on internal structure. Data were collected at 3 diverse community health sites in Victoria, Australia. Psychometric testing included both classical test theory and item response theory (IRT) approaches. Methods included Bayesian structural equation modelling (BSEM) for confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency and test-retest for reliability and Bayesian multiple indicators multiple causes (MIMIC) model for testing of differential item functioning (DIF).

RESULTS

Cognitive interviewing identified only one confusing term and this was clarified. All items were easy to read and understood as intended. A total of 525 completed questionnaires were included for psychometric analysis. All scales were homogenous with composite scale reliability ranging from .73 to .90. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for test-retest for the 7 scales ranged from 0.72 to 0.95. A 7-factor BSEM using small variance priors for cross-loadings and residual covariances was fitted to the data and the model of interest produced a satisfactory fit (posterior productive P value=.49, 95% CI for the difference between observed and replicated Chi-square values=-101.40-108.83, prior-posterior productive P value =.92). All items loaded on the relevant factor, with loadings ranging from 0.36 to 0.94. No significant cross-loading was found. There was no evidence of DIF for administration format, site area and health setting. However, discriminant validity was not well-established for Scales 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7. IRT analysis found all items provided precise information at different trait levels except for one item. All items demonstrated different sensitivity to different trait levels and represented a range of difficulty levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that the eHLQ is a tool with robust psychometric properties while further investigation of the discriminant validity among some of the scales is recommended. It is ready to be used to identify eHealth literacy strengths and challenges and assist the development of digital health interventions to ensure people with limited digital access and skills are not left behind.

Publisher

JMIR Publications Inc.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3