Distribution of health literacy strengths and weaknesses across socio-demographic groups: a cross-sectional survey using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)

Alison Beauchamp; Rachelle Buchbinder; Sarity Dodson; Roy W. Batterham; Gerald R. Elsworth; Crystal McPhee; Louise Sparkes; Melanie Hawkins; Richard H. Osborne

doi:10.1186/s12889-015-2056-z

Distribution of health literacy strengths and weaknesses across socio-demographic groups: a cross-sectional survey using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)

Alison Beauchamp^*, Rachelle Buchbinder, Sarity Dodson, Roy W. Batterham, Gerald R. Elsworth, Crystal McPhee, Louise Sparkes, Melanie Hawkins, Richard H. Osborne

^*Corresponding author for this work

140 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Recent advances in the measurement of health literacy allow description of a broad range of personal and social dimensions of the concept. Identifying differences in patterns of health literacy between population sub-groups will increase understanding of how health literacy contributes to health inequities and inform intervention development. The aim of this study was to use a multi-dimensional measurement tool to describe the health literacy of adults in urban and rural Victoria, Australia. Methods: Data were collected from clients (n∈=∈813) of 8 health and community care organisations, using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). Demographic and health service data were also collected. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Effect sizes (ES) for standardised differences in means were used to describe the magnitude of difference between demographic sub-groups. Results: Mean age of respondents was 72.1 (range 19-99) years. Females comprised 63 % of the sample, 48 % had not completed secondary education, and 96 % reported at least one existing health condition. Small to large ES were seen for mean differences in HLQ scales between most demographic groups. Compared with participants who spoke English at home, those not speaking English at home had much lower scores for most HLQ scales including the scales 'Understanding health information well enough to know what to do' (ES -1.09 [95 % confidence interval (CI) -1.33 to -0.84]), 'Ability to actively engage with healthcare providers' (ES -1.00 [95 % CI -1.24, -0.75]), and 'Navigating the healthcare system' (ES -0.72 [95 % CI -0.97, -0.48]). Similar patterns and ES were seen for participants born overseas compared with those born in Australia. Smaller ES were seen for sex, age group, private health insurance status, number of chronic conditions, and living alone. Conclusions: This study has revealed some large health literacy differences across nine domains of health literacy in adults using health services in Victoria. These findings provide insights into the relationship between health literacy and socioeconomic position in vulnerable groups and, given the focus of the HLQ, provide guidance for the development of equitable interventions.

Original language	English
Article number	678
Journal	BMC Public Health
Volume	15
Number of pages	13
ISSN	1471-2458
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2056-z
Publication status	Published - 21 Jul 2015
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Chronic disease
Culturally and linguistically diverse
Health inequities
Health literacy
Health Literacy Questionnaire
HLQ

Access to Document

10.1186/s12889-015-2056-zLicence: CC BY

Cite this

Beauchamp, A., Buchbinder, R., Dodson, S., Batterham, R. W., Elsworth, G. R., McPhee, C., Sparkes, L., Hawkins, M., & Osborne, R. H. (2015). Distribution of health literacy strengths and weaknesses across socio-demographic groups: a cross-sectional survey using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). BMC Public Health, 15, [678]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2056-z

@article{c8a02428977a4839885646f570db28bb,

title = "Distribution of health literacy strengths and weaknesses across socio-demographic groups: a cross-sectional survey using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)",

abstract = "Background: Recent advances in the measurement of health literacy allow description of a broad range of personal and social dimensions of the concept. Identifying differences in patterns of health literacy between population sub-groups will increase understanding of how health literacy contributes to health inequities and inform intervention development. The aim of this study was to use a multi-dimensional measurement tool to describe the health literacy of adults in urban and rural Victoria, Australia. Methods: Data were collected from clients (n∈=∈813) of 8 health and community care organisations, using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). Demographic and health service data were also collected. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Effect sizes (ES) for standardised differences in means were used to describe the magnitude of difference between demographic sub-groups. Results: Mean age of respondents was 72.1 (range 19-99) years. Females comprised 63 % of the sample, 48 % had not completed secondary education, and 96 % reported at least one existing health condition. Small to large ES were seen for mean differences in HLQ scales between most demographic groups. Compared with participants who spoke English at home, those not speaking English at home had much lower scores for most HLQ scales including the scales 'Understanding health information well enough to know what to do' (ES -1.09 [95 % confidence interval (CI) -1.33 to -0.84]), 'Ability to actively engage with healthcare providers' (ES -1.00 [95 % CI -1.24, -0.75]), and 'Navigating the healthcare system' (ES -0.72 [95 % CI -0.97, -0.48]). Similar patterns and ES were seen for participants born overseas compared with those born in Australia. Smaller ES were seen for sex, age group, private health insurance status, number of chronic conditions, and living alone. Conclusions: This study has revealed some large health literacy differences across nine domains of health literacy in adults using health services in Victoria. These findings provide insights into the relationship between health literacy and socioeconomic position in vulnerable groups and, given the focus of the HLQ, provide guidance for the development of equitable interventions.",

keywords = "Chronic disease, Culturally and linguistically diverse, Health inequities, Health literacy, Health Literacy Questionnaire, HLQ",

author = "Alison Beauchamp and Rachelle Buchbinder and Sarity Dodson and Batterham, {Roy W.} and Elsworth, {Gerald R.} and Crystal McPhee and Louise Sparkes and Melanie Hawkins and Osborne, {Richard H.}",

year = "2015",

month = jul,

day = "21",

doi = "10.1186/s12889-015-2056-z",

language = "English",

volume = "15",

journal = "BMC Public Health",

issn = "1471-2458",

publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Distribution of health literacy strengths and weaknesses across socio-demographic groups

T2 - a cross-sectional survey using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)

AU - Beauchamp, Alison

AU - Buchbinder, Rachelle

AU - Dodson, Sarity

AU - Batterham, Roy W.

AU - Elsworth, Gerald R.

AU - McPhee, Crystal

AU - Sparkes, Louise

AU - Hawkins, Melanie

AU - Osborne, Richard H.

PY - 2015/7/21

Y1 - 2015/7/21

N2 - Background: Recent advances in the measurement of health literacy allow description of a broad range of personal and social dimensions of the concept. Identifying differences in patterns of health literacy between population sub-groups will increase understanding of how health literacy contributes to health inequities and inform intervention development. The aim of this study was to use a multi-dimensional measurement tool to describe the health literacy of adults in urban and rural Victoria, Australia. Methods: Data were collected from clients (n∈=∈813) of 8 health and community care organisations, using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). Demographic and health service data were also collected. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Effect sizes (ES) for standardised differences in means were used to describe the magnitude of difference between demographic sub-groups. Results: Mean age of respondents was 72.1 (range 19-99) years. Females comprised 63 % of the sample, 48 % had not completed secondary education, and 96 % reported at least one existing health condition. Small to large ES were seen for mean differences in HLQ scales between most demographic groups. Compared with participants who spoke English at home, those not speaking English at home had much lower scores for most HLQ scales including the scales 'Understanding health information well enough to know what to do' (ES -1.09 [95 % confidence interval (CI) -1.33 to -0.84]), 'Ability to actively engage with healthcare providers' (ES -1.00 [95 % CI -1.24, -0.75]), and 'Navigating the healthcare system' (ES -0.72 [95 % CI -0.97, -0.48]). Similar patterns and ES were seen for participants born overseas compared with those born in Australia. Smaller ES were seen for sex, age group, private health insurance status, number of chronic conditions, and living alone. Conclusions: This study has revealed some large health literacy differences across nine domains of health literacy in adults using health services in Victoria. These findings provide insights into the relationship between health literacy and socioeconomic position in vulnerable groups and, given the focus of the HLQ, provide guidance for the development of equitable interventions.

AB - Background: Recent advances in the measurement of health literacy allow description of a broad range of personal and social dimensions of the concept. Identifying differences in patterns of health literacy between population sub-groups will increase understanding of how health literacy contributes to health inequities and inform intervention development. The aim of this study was to use a multi-dimensional measurement tool to describe the health literacy of adults in urban and rural Victoria, Australia. Methods: Data were collected from clients (n∈=∈813) of 8 health and community care organisations, using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). Demographic and health service data were also collected. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Effect sizes (ES) for standardised differences in means were used to describe the magnitude of difference between demographic sub-groups. Results: Mean age of respondents was 72.1 (range 19-99) years. Females comprised 63 % of the sample, 48 % had not completed secondary education, and 96 % reported at least one existing health condition. Small to large ES were seen for mean differences in HLQ scales between most demographic groups. Compared with participants who spoke English at home, those not speaking English at home had much lower scores for most HLQ scales including the scales 'Understanding health information well enough to know what to do' (ES -1.09 [95 % confidence interval (CI) -1.33 to -0.84]), 'Ability to actively engage with healthcare providers' (ES -1.00 [95 % CI -1.24, -0.75]), and 'Navigating the healthcare system' (ES -0.72 [95 % CI -0.97, -0.48]). Similar patterns and ES were seen for participants born overseas compared with those born in Australia. Smaller ES were seen for sex, age group, private health insurance status, number of chronic conditions, and living alone. Conclusions: This study has revealed some large health literacy differences across nine domains of health literacy in adults using health services in Victoria. These findings provide insights into the relationship between health literacy and socioeconomic position in vulnerable groups and, given the focus of the HLQ, provide guidance for the development of equitable interventions.

KW - Chronic disease

KW - Culturally and linguistically diverse

KW - Health inequities

KW - Health literacy

KW - Health Literacy Questionnaire

KW - HLQ

U2 - 10.1186/s12889-015-2056-z

DO - 10.1186/s12889-015-2056-z

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:84937562557

SN - 1471-2458

VL - 15

JO - BMC Public Health

JF - BMC Public Health

M1 - 678

ER -

Distribution of health literacy strengths and weaknesses across socio-demographic groups: a cross-sectional survey using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this