Adaptation of the Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire (HLS19-Q) for Russian-Speaking Populations-International Collaboration across Germany, Israel, Kazakhstan, Russia, and the USA

Cultural adaptation of a self-review tool for health promoting universities in Bulgaria

Introduction

The Health Promoting University initiative is unknown in Bulgaria, and the health promotion potential of Bulgarian universities has not been studied. In order to examine it, a suitable instrument is needed. The UK Healthy Universities Network provides an accessible Self-Review-Tool (SRT). Aim: To present the process of cultural adaptation of the SRT in Bulgarian language.

Methods

The standardized WHO methodology for cultural adaptation of instruments was followed in four stages: (1) Two language translations of the instrument into Bulgarian were made; (2) An expert Delphi discussion reached a consensus on specific health promoting (HP) terms, followed by a backward translation; (3) Pilot testing of the tool among university community representatives was conducted through a survey among a small sample, with independent responses to the SRT questionnaire followed by cognitive interviews; (4) Final revision of the instrument.

Results

Ten public health experts reached a consensus on the name of the initiative and various HP terms. Ten other respondents pre-tested the tool. Difficulties in responding the SRT concerned the meaning of some HP terms, complex words, the system of answers, limited applicability of some statements. Changes were made to 61 of the total 68 elements in the SRT.

Conclusion

All stages of the cultural adaptation were important for the final result. The adapted Bulgarian version of the SRT would be useful to Bulgarian universities that want to make a clear commitment to improving the health of their university community and the wider society.

General, Vaccination, Navigational and Digital Health Literacy of Students Enrolled in Different Medical and Health Educational Programs

Evaluating prospective graduates' health literacy profiles before they enter the job market is crucial. Our research aimed to explore the health literacy levels of medical and health students by assessing their ability to obtain health-related information, understand healthcare systems, use e-health, and be informed about vaccination as well as to explore the factors associated with health literacy. Short versions of the HLS19-Q12 were used for a cross-sectional survey that was carried out among 1042 students enrolled in various medical and health educational programs at three medical universities in Kazakhstan between September and November of 2023. Additionally, instruments such as Digital Health Literacy (HLS19-DIGI), Navigational Health Literacy (HLS19-NAV), and Vaccination Health Literacy (HLS19-VAC) were employed. The score of General Health Literacy was 88.26 ± 17.5. One in eight students encountered difficulties in Vaccination Health Literacy. Despite overall high health literacy, Navigational Health Literacy posed challenges for all students. The Public Health students exhibited the highest General Health Literacy (91.53 ± 13.22), followed by students in Nursing, General Medicine, other educational programs (Dentistry and Biomedicine) and Pharmacy. Financial constraints for medication and medical examinations significantly influenced health literacy across all types of individuals. Since comprehensive health literacy instruction or interventions are still uncommon in the curricula, it seems reasonable to develop and incorporate appropriate courses for medical and health educational programs.

Measuring General Health Literacy in Chinese adults: validation of the HLS19-Q12 instrument

BACKGROUND

Health literacy measurement lays a solid foundation to identify associations with health outcomes and monitor population health literacy levels over time. In mainland China, most existing health literacy instruments are either knowledge-based or practice-based, making health literacy results incomparable between China and other countries. This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the 12-item Health Literacy Population Survey (HLS19-Q12) in a general population of Chinese adults.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted to recruit primary carers of students from 11 schools in Zhengzhou, Henan Province, using convenience cluster sampling. Participants completed an online self-administered survey that collected information on key sociodemographics, health literacy (HLS19-Q12 and a comparison tool: Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)), and health-related outcomes. Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist as a guideline, we tested internal consistency, test-retest reliability, content validity, structural validity, concurrent predictive validity, and convergent validity of the HLS19-Q12.

RESULTS

Overall, 14,184 participants completed the full survey. The HLS19-Q12 showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.93), moderate test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.54), satisfactory content validity (based on the 12-matrix health literacy model), and strong structural validity (comparative fit index = 0.94, Tucker and Lewis's index of fit = 0.93, root mean square error of approximation = 0.095). Concurrent predictive validity results showed health literacy was associated with both health determinants and health-related outcomes. The HLS19-Q12 had weak to strong correlations (coefficients = 0.24 to 0.42) with the nine scales of the HLQ. Respondents had an average score of 81.6 (± 23.0) when using the HLS19-Q12, with 35.0% and 7.5% having problematic and inadequate levels of health literacy, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The HLS19-Q12 is a reliable and valid instrument to measure health literacy in our sample. Further validation is needed with a more nationally representative sample of Chinese adults. The HLS19-Q12 could be used as a comprehensive, skills-based, and easy-to-administer health literacy assessment tool integrated into population surveys and intervention evaluations.

Differences in health literacy domains among migrants and their descendants in Germany

Background

Health literacy (HL) is considered to be an important precondition for health. HL research often identifies migrants as vulnerable for low HL. However, in-depth data on HL among migrants especially in its domains of health care, disease prevention and health promotion and its determinants are still scarce.

Objective

The aim of this study was therefore to analyse the current status of HL among migrants and their descendants from Turkey and from the former Soviet Union (FSU) in Germany and factors associated with it. This has not been studied using large-scale data and bilingual interviews. We differentiate between dimensions of HL, namely the domains of health care, disease prevention and health promotion which goes beyond many previous studies. In addition, we explore new mechanisms by testing the explanatory power of self-efficacy and interethnic contacts for migrants' HL.

Methods

The study includes 825 first- and second-generation adult migrants from two of the largest immigration groups in Germany, from Turkey and FSU, who were interviewed face-to-face in German, Turkish or Russian in late summer 2020. HL was measured using the HLS19-Q47 instrument. Age, gender, educational level, social status and financial deprivation, chronic illness, health-related literacy skills, self-efficacy, interethnic contacts, migration generation, duration of stay and region of origin were considered as possible determinants. Ordinary least square regressions were estimated.

Results

The average general HL score was 65.5. HL in health promotion and disease prevention was lower than in health care. Low financial deprivation, health-related literacy skills, and self-efficacy were positively correlated with each HL domain. Educational level, social status, age, gender, duration of stay and interethnic contacts were positively correlated with HL in some domains. Region of origin was only correlated with the domain of disease prevention until interethnic contact was accounted for.

Conclusion

Our study contributes to the existing knowledge by analyzing different domains of HL and testing its correlations with self-efficacy and interethnic contact among migrants. We reveal that migrants cannot generally be considered as vulnerable for low HL, as oftentimes outlined. There is a need for interventions e.g. to enhance the understanding of health information among subgroups with lower HL.