Korean J Adult Nurs.  2018 Oct;30(5):504-515. 10.7475/kjan.2018.30.5.504.

Cross-cultural Adaptation and Validation of the eHealth Literacy Scale in Korea

• Chang SJ
• Yang E
• Ryu H
• Kim HJ
• Yoon JY

• KMID: 2423841
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.7475/kjan.2018.30.5.504

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the eHealth Literacy Scale into Korean (KeHEALS) and evaluate its reliability and validity.
METHODS
The cross-cultural adaptation of the KeHEALS was conducted according to the World Health Organization's guideline. To evaluate the reliability and validity, the data of 397 participants (210 young adults and 187 older adults) were collected from 2017 November to 2018 February. An online survey was conducted with young adults, while a face-to-face survey was conducted with older adults in two senior welfare centers. The reliability of the KeHEALS was examined using the internal consistency and test-retest reliability tests. Regarding the validity, the content validity index was calculated for content validity, and exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses and the hypothesized test were conducted for assessing construct validity of the KeHEALS.
RESULTS
The Cronbach's α coefficient was .89 and the intraclass correlation coefficient for the 2-week test-retest reliability was .80. The content validity index of the KeHEALS was 1.0. From the exploratory factor analysis, eight items were retained in one factor, which accounted for 58.1% of the total variance. This factor structure was confirmed by the confirmatory factor analysis. The total score of the KeHEALS was significantly correlated with the attitudes toward internet health information.
CONCLUSION
The findings of this study provide evidence for the adequate psychometric properties of the KeHEALS. The KeHEALS will be useful to evaluate the eHealth literacy among Koreans.

MeSH Terms

Adult
Global Health
Health Literacy
Humans
Internet
Korea*
Literacy*
Psychometrics
Reproducibility of Results
Telemedicine*
Young Adult

Reference

1. Berkman ND, Davis TC, MaCormack L. Health literacy: what is it? J Health Commun. 2010; 15:Suppl 2. 9–19. DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2010.499985.

2. DeMarco J, Nystrom M. The important of health literacy in patient education. J Consum Health Internet. 2010; 14(3):294–301. DOI: 10.1080/15398285.2010.502021.

3. Kim S, Oh J, Lee Y. Health literacy: an evolutionary concept analysis. J Korean Acad Soc Nurs Educ. 2013; 19(4):558–570. DOI: 10.5977/jkasne.2013.19.4.558.

4. Cutrona SL, Mazor KM, Vieux SN, Luger TM, Volkman JE, Finney Rutten LJ. Health information-seeking on behalf of others: characteristics of “surrogate seekers”. J Cancer Educ. 2015; 30(1):12–19. DOI: 10.1007/s13187-014-0701-3.

5. Cho H, Jung JT, Lee Y, Kim Y, Jang SH, Jung SM, et al. Research on the establishment of mid-and-long-term strategies for providing consumer health information [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare;2016. cited 2018 March 3. Available from: http://www.prism.go.kr/homepage/theme/retrieveThemeDetail.do?leftMenuLevel=110&cond_brm_super_id=NB000120061201100060495&research_id=1351000-201600369.

6. Tonsaker T, Bartlett G, Trpkov C. Health information on the internet. Gold mine or minefield? Can Fam Physician. 2014; 60(5):407–408.

7. Park DJ, Kwon MS, Choi J. The influence of health information orientation, attitudes of internet health information, and e-Health literacy on personal health behaviors. J Public Relat Res. 2013; 17(3):379–413. DOI: 10.15814/jpr.2013.17.3.379.

8. Stellefson M, Hanik B, Chaney B, Chaney D, Tennant B, Chavarria EA. eHealth literacy among college students: a systematic review with implications for eHealth education. J Med Internet Res. 2011; 13(4):e102. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1703.

9. Norman CD, Skinner HA. eHEALS: the eHealth Literacy Scale. J Med Internet Res. 2006; 8(4):e27. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.8.4.e27.

10. Paramio Pérez G, Almagro BJ, Hernando Gómez Á, Aguaded Gómez JI. Validation of the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) in Spanish university students. Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2015; 89(3):329–338. DOI: 10.4321/S1135-57272015000300010.

11. De Caro W, Corvo E, Marucci AR, Mitello L, Lancia L, Sansoni J. eHealth Literacy Scale: an nursing analysis and Italian validation. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2016; 225:949.

12. Koo M, Norman C, Chang HM. Psychometric evaluation of a Chinese version of the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) in school age children. Int Electron J Health Educ. 2012; 15:29–36.

13. 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. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.6709.

14. Kim JO, Park JK. The reliability of health information on the internet and the medical advertising's attitudes on the internet according to e-Health literacy level. J Humanit Soc Sci 21. 2017; 8(4):299–314. DOI: 10.22143/HSS21.8.4.17.

15. Lee BK, Byoun WJ, Lim JL. The influence of individual's e-Health literacy on doctor-patient communication. J Cybercommunication. 2010; 27(3):89–125.

16. Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning, Korea Internet & Security Agency. 2016 Survey on the internet usage [Internet]. Naju: Korea Internet & Security Agency;2017. cited 2018 March 7. Available from: https://isis.kisa.or.kr/board/index.jsp?pageId=060100&bbsId=7&itemId=817&pageIndex=1.

17. Park JH, Kwon YH. Standardization of Korean version of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE-K) for use in the elderly part II diagnostic validity. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc. 1989; 28(3):508–513.

18. Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research: generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. 9th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins;2012.

19. Kline RB. Principle and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press;2005.

20. Park MS, Kang KJ, Jang SJ, Lee JY, Chang SJ. Evaluating test-retest reliability in patient-reported outcome measures for older people: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2018; 79:58–69. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.11.003.

21. Zulman DK, Kirch M, Zheng K, An LC. Trust in the internet as a health resource among older adults: analysis of data from a nationally representative survey. J Med Internet Res. 2011; 13(1):e19. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1552.

22. Paige SR, Krieger JL, Stellefson ML. The influence of eHealth literacy on perceived trust in online health communication channels and sources. J Health Commun. 2017; 22(1):53–65. DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2016.1250846.

23. Jung WS, Kang HG, Suk MH, Kim EH. The use of the internet health information for the elderly. J Korean Public Health Nurs. 2011; 25(1):48–60.

24. Chang SJ, Im EO. A path analysis of internet health information seeking behaviors among older adults. Geriatr Nurs. 2014; 35(2):137–141. DOI: 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2013.11.005.

25. World Health Organization. Process of translation and adaptation of instruments [internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization;2017. cited 2017 November 3. Available from: http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/.

26. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 7th ed (Pearson new international edition). Essex: Pearson Education Limited;2014.

27. Bae BL. Structural equation modeling with AMOS 17.0. Seoul: Cheongram Books;2009.

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

29. Richtering SS, Morris R, Soh SE, Barker A, Bampi F, Neubeck L, et al. Examination of an eHealth Literacy Scale and a health literacy scale in a population with moderate to high cardiovascular risk: Rasch analysis. PLoS ONE. 2017; 12(4):e0175372. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175372.

30. Peterson RA. A meta-analysis of variance accounted for and factor loading in exploratory factor analysis. Mark Lett. 2000; 11(3):261–275.

31. Kang H. A guide on the use of factor analysis in the assessment of construct validity. J Korean Acad Nurs. 2013; 43(5):587–594. DOI: 10.4040/jkan.2013.43.5.587.

32. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR. Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess. 1998; 2(14):1–74.

33. Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016; 15(2):155–163. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.

34. Kong KA. Statistical methods: reliability assessment and method comparison. Ewha Med J. 2017; 40(1):9–16. DOI: 10.12771/emj.2017.40.1.9.