Sarah Richtering|Rebecca Morris|Sze?Ee Soh|Anna Barker|Fiona Bampi|Lis Neubeck|Genevieve Coorey|John C. Mulley|John Chalmers|Tim Usherwood|David Peiris|Clara K Chow|Julie Redfern
Examination of an eHealth literacy scale and a health literacy scale in a population with moderate to high cardiovascular risk: Rasch analyses
University of Geneva|The George Institute for Global Health|Monash University|Monash University|Monash University|The George Institute for Global Health|The George Institute for Global Health|University of Sydney|Edinburgh Napier University|The George Institute for Global Health|University of Sydney|The George Institute for Global Health|The George Institute for Global Health|University of Sydney|The George Institute for Global Health|University of Sydney|The George Institute for Global Health|University of Sydney|The George Institute for Global Health|University of Sydney|Westmead Hospital|The George Institute for Global Health|University of Sydney
electronic health ehealth strategies evolving making important valid scales assess ehealth health literacy item response theory methods rasch measurement model increasingly used psychometric evaluation scales paper aims examine internal construct validity ehealth health literacy scale using rasch analysis population moderate high cardiovascular disease riskthe first 397 participants connect study completed electronic health literacy scale eheals health literacy questionnaire hlq overall rasch model fit well five key psychometric properties analysed unidimensionality response thresholds targeting differential item functioning internal consistencythe eheals good overall model fit 2 548 p 006 ordered response thresholds reasonable targeting good internal consistency person separation index psi 090 however appear measure two constructs ehealth literacy hlq subscales except subscale 5 fit rasch model 2 18186060 p 000058 suboptimal targeting subscales subscales 6 9 displayed disordered thresholds indicating participants difficulty distinguishing response options subscales nonetheless demonstrate moderate good internal consistency psi 062082rasch analyses demonstrated eheals good measures internal construct validity although appears capture different aspects ehealth literacy eg using ehealth understanding ehealth whilst studies required confirm finding may necessary constructs eheals scored separately nine hlq subscales shown measure single construct health literacy however participants scores may represent actual level ability distinction response categories unclear last four subscales reducing response categories subscales may improve ability hlq distinguish different levels health literacy