Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Protocol

eHealth literacy measurement tools: a systematic review protocol

Authors: Carole Délétroz, Marina Canepa Allen, Maxime Sasseville, Alexandra Rouquette, Patrick Bodenmann, Marie-Pierre Gagnon

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2022

Abstract

Background

Improving eHealth literacy (eHL) is one of the biggest challenges currently facing the global healthcare community. Indeed the use of digital services has the potential to engage patients in care as well as improve the effectiveness of chronic disease self-management, it remains highly dependent on a patient’s specific skills and experiences in the health care systems. Although eHealth literacy has gained momentum in the past decade, it remains an underresearched area, particularly eHealth literacy measurement. The aim of the review is to identify patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of eHealth literacy for adult populations and to summarize the evidence on their psychometric properties.

Methods

We will conduct a systematic literature review of the tools used to measure eHealth literacy for adult population. The search strategy aims to find published studies. A three-step search strategy will be used in this review. Published studies will be searched in CINAHL, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception until end. Grey literature will be searched to find theses. Database search strategies will be formulated and tested with the assistance of an expert Health Sciences Librarian. The selection of studies will be done by two independent reviewers. Disagreements will be resolved through consensus, and a third reviewer will solve discrepancies. Furthermore, two reviewers will independently evaluate the methodological rigor of the instruments development and testing and assign a grade using the standardized Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Disagreements will be discussed with a third reviewer, expert in psychometrics.

Extracted data will be aggregated and analyzed to produce a set of synthesized findings that will be used to develop evidence-informed recommendations in regard of eHL instruments. We will present a synthesis of all instruments, their psychometric properties, and make recommendations for eHL instrument selection in practice. Reporting will be informed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and a PRISMA flow diagram.

Discussion

This systematic review will summarize the evidence on the psychometric properties of PROMs instruments used to measure eHL and will help clinicians, managers, and policy-makers to select an appropriate instrument.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42021232765

European Commission. Flash Eurobarometer 404 “European citizens' digital health literacy”; 2014. https://doi.org/10.2759/88726.CrossRef

Novillo OD. Digital health literacy. First Meeting of the WHO GCM/NCD Working Group on Health Literacy for NCDs Digital Health Literacy for NCDs. Geneva; 2017. https://www.who.int/global-coordination-mechanism/working-groups/digital_hl.pdf

Cushing CC, Steele RG. A meta-analytic review of ehealth interventions for pediatric health promoting and maintaining behaviors. J Pediatr Psychol. 2010;35(9):937–49. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsq023.CrossRefPubMed

Marcolino MS, Oliveira J, D'Agostino M, Ribeiro AL, Alkmim M, Novillo-Ortiz D. The impact of mHealth interventions: systematic review of systematic reviews. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018;6(1):e23. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.8873.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Gee PM, Paterniti DA, Ward D, Miller LMS. e-Patients perceptions of using personal health records for self-management support of chronic illness. Comput Inform Nurs. 2015;33(6):229–37. https://doi.org/10.1097/CIN.0000000000000151.CrossRefPubMed

Heinrich C, Karner K. Ways to optimize understanding health related information: the patients’ perspective. Geriatr Nurs. 2011;32(1):29–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2010.09.001.CrossRefPubMed

Manafo E, Wong S. Promoting eHealth literacy in older adults: key informant perspectives. Can J Diet Pract Res. 2013;74(1):37–41. https://doi.org/10.3148/74.1.2013.37.CrossRefPubMed

Neter E, Brainin E. eHealth literacy: extending the digital divide to the realm of health information. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(1):e19. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1619.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Griebel L, Enwald H, Gilstad H, Pohl AL, Moreland J, Sedlmayr M. eHealth literacy research-Quo vadis? Inform Health Soc Care. 2018;43(4):427–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538157.2017.1364247.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Neter E, Brainin E. Perceived and performed ehealth literacy: survey and simulated performance test. JMIR Hum Factors. 2017;4(1):e2. https://doi.org/10.2196/humanfactors.6523.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Boogerd EA, Arts T, Engelen LJ, van de Belt TH. “What Is eHealth”: Time for An Update? JMIR Res Protoc. 2015;4(1):e29. https://doi.org/10.2196/resprot.4065.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Smith B, Magnani JW. New technologies, new disparities: The intersection of electronic health and digital health literacy. Int J Cardiol. 2019;292:280–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2019.05.066.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Diviani N, van den Putte B, Giani S, van Weert JC. Low health literacy and evaluation of online health information: a systematic review of the literature. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(5):e112. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4018.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Kickbusch I, Pelikan JM, Apfel F, Tsouros AD. Health literacy: The solid facts. Copenhagen: WHO; 2013.

15.

Norman CD, Skinner HA. eHealth literacy: essential skills for consumer health in a networked world. J Med Internet Res. 2006;8(2):e9. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8.2.e9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Norgaard O, Furstrand D, Klokker L, Karnoe A, Batterham R, Kayser L, et al. The e-health literacy framework: a conceptual framework for characterizing e-health users and their interaction with e-health systems. Knowl Manage E-Learn. 2015;7(4):522–40.

17.

Norman CD, Skinner HA. eHEALS: the eHealth literacy scale. J Med Internet Res. 2006;8(4):e27. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8.4.e27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Soellner R, Huber S, Reder M. The concept of eHealth literacy and its measurement. J Media Psychol. 2014;26:29–38. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000104.CrossRef

19.

Karnoe A, Kayser L. How is eHealth literacy measured and what do the measurements tell us? A systematic review. Knowl Manage E-Learn. 2015;7(4):576–600. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2015.07.038.CrossRef

20.

Buyl R, Beogo I, Fobelets M, Deletroz C, Van Landuyt P, Dequanter S, et al. e-Health interventions for healthy aging: a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2020;9(1):128. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01385-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Kayser L, Karnoe A, Furstrand D, Batterham R, Christensen KB, Elsworth G, et al. A Multidimensional tool based on the eHealth literacy framework: development and initial validity testing of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ). J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(2):e36. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8371.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Falissard B. Mesurer la subjectivité en santé: perspective méthodologique et statistique. Paris: Elsevier Masson; 2008.

23.

Waltz CF, Strickland OL, Lenz ER. Measurement in nursing and health research. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 2017.

24.

Neter E, Brainin E, Baron-Epel O. The dimensionality of health literacy and eHealth literacy. Eur Health Psychol. 2015;17(6):275–80.

25.

van der Vaart R, Drossaert CH, de Heus M, Taal E, van de Laar MA. Measuring actual eHealth literacy among patients with rheumatic diseases: a qualitative analysis of problems encountered using Health 1.0 and Health 2.0 applications. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(2):e27. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2428.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Bannigan K, Watson R. Reliability and validity in a nutshell. J Clin Nurs. 2009;18(23):3237–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.02939.x.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Neter E, Brainin E. Association between health literacy, eHealth literacy, and health outcomes among patients with long-term conditions. Eur Psychol. 2019;24(1):68–81. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000350.CrossRef

28.

Hsu W, Chiang C, Yang S. The effect of individual factors on health behaviors among college students: the mediating effects of eHealth literacy. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(12):e287. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3542.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Clement S, Ibrahim S, Crichton N, Wolf M, Rowlands G. Complex interventions to improve the health of people with limited literacy: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;75(3):340–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2009.01.008.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Jensen JD, King AJ, Davis LA, Guntzviller LM. Utilization of internet technology by low-income adults: the role of health literacy, health numeracy, and computer assistance. J Aging Health. 2010;22(6):804–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264310366161.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Watkins I, Xie B. eHealth literacy interventions for older adults: a systematic review of the literature. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(11):e225. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3318.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

van der Vaart R, Drossaert C. Development of the Digital Health Literacy Instrument: Measuring a Broad Spectrum of Health 1.0 and Health 2.0 Skills. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(1):e27. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6709.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

van der Vaart R, van Deursen AJ, Drossaert CH, Taal E, van Dijk JA, van de Laar MA. Does the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) measure what it intends to measure? Validation of a Dutch version of the eHEALS in two adult populations. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(4):e86. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1840.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Mokkink LB, Prinsen C, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Bouter LM, De Vet H, et al. COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): User manual. Amsterdam: Amsterdam Public Health research institute; 2018.

35.

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Prinsen CA, de Vet HC, COSMIN Steering Committee. Taxonomy of measurement properties: A commentary on Polit (2015). Int J Nurs Stud. 2016;53:399–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.08.010.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Mokkink LB, de Vet HCW, Prinsen CAC, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Bouter LM, et al. COSMIN risk of bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(5):1171–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Terwee CB, Prinsen CAC, Chiarotto A, Westerman MJ, Patrick DL, Alonso J, et al. COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(5):1159–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1829-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Kim H, Xie B. Health literacy in the eHealth era: a systematic review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns. 2017;100(6):1073–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2017.01.015.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, vol. 4. Chichester: Wiley; 2011.

40.

Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Cochrane Canada: David Moher on crystal clear reporting of systematic reviews and EQUATOR Network. 2010 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVFYenon1Jo.

42.

Terwee CB, Jansma EP, Riphagen II, de Vet HC. Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement 434 instruments. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(8):1115–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9528-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Endnote. https://endnote.com/. Accessed 30 June 2021.

44.

Kim J, Jung H, Bates DW. History and trends of “personal health record” research in PubMed. Healthc Inform Res. 2011;17(1):3–17. https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2011.17.1.3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Bittlingmayer UH, Dadaczynski K, Sahrai D, van den Broucke S, Okan O. Digitale Gesundheitskompetenz–Konzeptionelle Verortung, Erfassung und Förderung mit Fokus auf Kinder und Jugendliche. Bundesgesundheitsbl Gesundheitsforsch Gesundheitsschutz. 2020;63(2):176–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-019-03087-6.CrossRef

46.

Covidence. https://www.covidence.org/. Accessed 30 June 2021.

47.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. The Prisma Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and metaanalyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoSMed. 2009;6(7):e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.CrossRef

48.

COSMIN. https://www.cosmin.nl/tools/guideline-conducting-systematic-review-outcome-measures/5525. Accessed 30 June 2021.

49.

Terwee CB, Prinsen C, Chiarotto A, De Vet H, Bouter LM, Alonso J, et al. COSMIN methodology for assessing the content validity of PROMs: User manual. Amsterdam: VU University Medical Center; 2018.

50.

Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Rodgers M, Sowden A, Petticrew M, et al. Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: effectiveness of interventions to promote smoke alarm ownership and function. Evaluation. 2009;15(1):49–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389008097871.CrossRef

52.

Prinsen CAC, Mokkink LB, Bouter LM, Alonso J, Patrick DL, de Vet HCW, et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(5):1147–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: eHealth literacy measurement tools: a systematic review protocol
Authors: Carole Délétroz
Marina Canepa Allen
Maxime Sasseville
Alexandra Rouquette
Patrick Bodenmann
Marie-Pierre Gagnon
Publication date: 01-12-2022
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-02076-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

eHealth literacy measurement tools: a systematic review protocol

Abstract

Background

Methods

Discussion

Systematic review registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Discussion

Systematic review registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Safety and efficacy of pilocarpine, cevimeline, and diquafosol compared to artificial tears for the treatment of dry eye: protocol for a systematic review

A systematic review of economic evaluations of cervical cancer screening methods

Impacts of parental technoference on parent-child relationships and child health and developmental outcomes: a scoping review protocol

PICO entity extraction for preclinical animal literature

Implementation of medicines pricing policies in sub-Saharan Africa: systematic review

Efficacy of resistive exercise on skeletal muscle-related outcomes in cancer survivors: a systematic review protocol