IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v20y2019i1d10.1007_s10198-019-01062-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychometric properties of the Hungarian version of the eHealth Literacy Scale

Author

Listed:
  • Zsombor Zrubka

    (Corvinus University of Budapest
    Corvinus University of Budapest)

  • Ottó Hajdu

    (Eötvös Loránd University)

  • Fanni Rencz

    (Corvinus University of Budapest
    Hungarian Academy of Sciences)

  • Petra Baji

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

  • László Gulácsi

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

  • Márta Péntek

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

Abstract

Background We adapted the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) for Hungary and tested its psychometric properties on a large representative online sample of the general population. Methods The Hungarian version of eHEALS was developed using forward–backward translation. For the valuation study, 1000 respondents were recruited in early 2019 from a large online panel by a survey company. We tested internal consistency, test–retest reliability and construct and criterion validity using classical test theory, as well as item characteristics using an item-response theory (IRT) graded response model (GRM). Results 55% of respondents were female, and 22.1% were ≥ 65 years old. Mean eHEALS score was 29.2 (SD: 5.18). Internal consistency was good (Cronbach’s α = 0.90), and test–retest reliability was moderate (intraclass correlation r = 0.64). We identified a single-factor structure by exploratory factor analysis, explaining 85% of test variance. Essential criteria for GRM analysis were met. Items 3 and 4 (search of health resources) were the least difficult, followed by items 5 and 8 (utilisation of health information), and then items 1 and 2 (awareness of health resources). Items 6 and 7 (appraisal of health resources) were most difficult. The measurement properties of eHEALS were not affected by gender, age, education or income levels. Female gender, older age, intensity of health information seeking, formal health education and visit at the electronic health-record website were associated with higher eHEALS scores, as well as best and worst self-perceived health states, BMI

Suggested Citation

  • Zsombor Zrubka & Ottó Hajdu & Fanni Rencz & Petra Baji & László Gulácsi & Márta Péntek, 2019. "Psychometric properties of the Hungarian version of the eHealth Literacy Scale," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(1), pages 57-69, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:20:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10198-019-01062-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-019-01062-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-019-01062-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-019-01062-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Judith Aponte & Kathleen M. Nokes, 2017. "Validating an electronic health literacy scale in an older hispanic population," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(17-18), pages 2703-2711, September.
    2. Rizopoulos, Dimitris, 2006. "ltm: An R Package for Latent Variable Modeling and Item Response Analysis," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 17(i05).
    3. Leonard Feldt, 1969. "A test of the hypothesis that cronbach's alpha or kuder-richardson coefficent twenty is the same for two tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 34(3), pages 363-373, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Óscar Brito Fernandes & Márta Péntek & Dionne Kringos & Niek Klazinga & László Gulácsi & Petra Baji, 2020. "Eliciting preferences for outpatient care experiences in Hungary: A discrete choice experiment with a national representative sample," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-15, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nick Bailey, 2020. "Measuring Poverty Efficiently Using Adaptive Deprivation Scales," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 891-910, June.
    2. W. W. Koczkodaj & T. Kakiashvili & A. Szymańska & J. Montero-Marin & R. Araya & J. Garcia-Campayo & K. Rutkowski & D. Strzałka, 2017. "How to reduce the number of rating scale items without predictability loss?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 581-593, May.
    3. Yang Yixin & Lü Xin & Ma Jian & Qiao Han, 2014. "A Robust Factor Analysis Model for Dichotomous Data," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 2(5), pages 437-450, October.
    4. Arulmani Thiyagarajan & Tyler G. James & Roy Rillera Marzo, 2022. "Psychometric properties of the 21-item Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21) among Malaysians during COVID-19: a methodological study," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, December.
    5. Frick, Hannah & Strobl, Carolin & Leisch, Friedrich & Zeileis, Achim, 2012. "Flexible Rasch Mixture Models with Package psychomix," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i07).
    6. Daniel L. Oberski, 2016. "A Review of Latent Variable Modeling With R," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 41(2), pages 226-233, April.
    7. Cervantes, Víctor H., 2017. "DFIT: An R Package for Raju's Differential Functioning of Items and Tests Framework," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 76(i05).
    8. Andrew Karl & Randy Eubank & Jelena Milovanovic & Mark Reiser & Dennis Young, 2014. "Using RngStreams for parallel random number generation in C++ and R," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 1301-1320, October.
    9. Sora Lee & Daniel M. Bolt, 2018. "Asymmetric Item Characteristic Curves and Item Complexity: Insights from Simulation and Real Data Analyses," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 83(2), pages 453-475, June.
    10. Wolf E Mehling & Michael Acree & Anita Stewart & Jonathan Silas & Alexander Jones, 2018. "The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness, Version 2 (MAIA-2)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Jochen Ranger & Kay Brauer, 2022. "On the Generalized S − X 2 –Test of Item Fit: Some Variants, Residuals, and a Graphical Visualization," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 47(2), pages 202-230, April.
    12. Nick Bailey & Anne-Catherine Guio, 2022. "Adaptive Deprivation Scales in a Multi-National Context: The European Child Deprivation Indicators," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 15(6), pages 2335-2362, December.
    13. José Antonio López-López & Juan Botella & Julio Sánchez-Meca & Fulgencio Marín-Martínez, 2013. "Alternatives for Mixed-Effects Meta-Regression Models in the Reliability Generalization Approach," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 38(5), pages 443-469, October.
    14. Fuchs, Lisa Elena & Orero, Levi & Apondi, Victoria Atieno & Kipkorir, Lang'at, 2021. "How to stop wasting money in international development: Using a structured group selection approach to counter procedural inefficiency," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    15. Arnond Sakworawich & Howard Wainer, 2020. "Scoring Tests With Contaminated Response Vectors," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 45(2), pages 209-226, April.
    16. Tormod Bøe & Mari Hysing & Jens Christoffer Skogen & Kyrre Breivik, 2016. "The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): Factor Structure and Gender Equivalence in Norwegian Adolescents," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, May.
    17. Dawit G. Ayele & Temesgen Zewotir & Henry Mwambi, 2014. "Using Rasch Modeling to Re-Evaluate Rapid Malaria Diagnosis Test Analyses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-11, June.
    18. Luyao Xie & Phoenix K. H. Mo, 2023. "Comparison of eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) and Digital Health Literacy Instrument (DHLI) in Assessing Electronic Health Literacy in Chinese Older Adults: A Mixed-Methods Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-13, February.
    19. Paula Fariña & Jorge González & Ernesto San Martín, 2019. "The Use of an Identifiability-Based Strategy for the Interpretation of Parameters in the 1PL-G and Rasch Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(2), pages 511-528, June.
    20. Francisco Caballero & Marta Miret & Beatriz Olaya & Jaime Perales & Ruy López-Ridaura & Josep Haro & Somnath Chatterji & José Ayuso-Mateos, 2014. "Evaluation of Affect in Mexico and Spain: Psychometric Properties and Usefulness of an Abbreviated Version of the Day Reconstruction Method," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 915-935, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    eHEALS; eHealth literacy; Item-response theory; Validation; Hungary; EQ-5D-5L;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:20:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10198-019-01062-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.