Critical health literacy: A review and critical analysis
Though there has been a considerable expansion of interest in the health literacy concept worldwide, there has also been criticism that this concept has been poorly defined, that it stretches the idea of "literacy" to an indefensible extent and more specifically, that it adds little to the existing concerns and intervention approaches of the better established discipline of health promotion. This paper takes as a starting point the expanded model of health literacy advanced by Nutbeam (2000) and addresses these concerns by interrogating the concept of "critical health literacy" in order to draw conclusions about its utility for advancing the health of individuals and communities. The constituent domains of critical health literacy are identified; namely information appraisal, understanding the social determinants of health, and collective action, and as far as possible each are clearly delineated, with links to related concepts made explicit. The paper concludes that an appreciation of work undertaken in a range of different disciplines, such as media studies, medical sociology, and evidence-based medicine can enhance our understanding of the critical health literacy construct and help us understand its usefulness as a social asset which helps individuals towards a critical engagement with health information. There is some evidence that aspects of critical health literacy have indeed been found to be a resource for better health outcomes, but more research is needed in this area, both to develop quantitative and qualitative approaches to evaluating health literacy skills, and to offer convincing evidence that investment in programmes designed to enhance critical health literacy are worthwhile.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 73 (2011)
Issue (Month): 1 (July)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:73:y:2011:i:1:p:60-67. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.