↓ Skip to main content

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

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
53 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
171 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
358 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Distribution of health literacy strengths and weaknesses across socio-demographic groups: a cross-sectional survey using the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2056-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

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

Abstract

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. 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. 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. 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 358 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 355 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 63 18%
Lecturer 41 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 11%
Student > Bachelor 37 10%
Researcher 37 10%
Other 78 22%
Unknown 62 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 104 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 82 23%
Social Sciences 27 8%
Psychology 25 7%
Computer Science 6 2%
Other 33 9%
Unknown 81 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2019.
All research outputs
#797,488
of 19,484,593 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#834
of 12,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,032
of 245,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,484,593 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 245,074 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them