Schools, health literacy and public health: possibilities and challenges

Health literacy is a concept that can be widely embraced by schools. Schools throughout the world contribute to the achievement of public health goals in conjunction with their educational commitments. In this paper, the interface between a school's core business of education and public health goals is identified, and examples provided in the area of nutrition demonstrating how these links can operate at school level. The structure and function of the health promoting school is described and the author proposes that there is a very close connection between the health promoting school and the enabling factors necessary in achieving health literacy. Major findings in the literature that provide evidence of good practices in school health education and promotion initiatives are described. Also, those factors that make schools effective and which facilitate learning for students are identified. There is a substantial overlap between the successful components of a health promoting school and effective schools. This enables schools to potentially achieve all three levels of health literacy, including level 3—critical health literacy. However, there are three challenges that must be addressed to enable schools to achieve this level: the traditional structure and function of schools, teachers practices and skills, and time and resources. Strategies are proposed to address all three areas and to reduce the impediments to achieving the goals of health literacy and public health using the school as a setting.

Health literacy revisited : what do we mean and why does it matter?

‘Health literacy’ refers to accessing, understanding and using information to make health decisions. However, despite its introduction into the World Health Organization's Health Promotion Glossary, the term remains a confusing concept. We consider various definitions and measurements of health literacy in the international and Australian literature, and discuss the distinction between the broader concept of ‘health literacy’ (applicable to everyday life) and ‘medical literacy’ (related to individuals as patients within health care settings). We highlight the importance of health literacy in relation to the health promotion and preventive health agenda. Because health literacy involves knowledge, motivation and activation, it is a complex thing to measure and to influence. The development of health literacy policies will be facilitated by better evidence on the extent, patterns and impact of low health literacy, and what might be involved in improving it. However, the current lack of consensus of definitions and measurement of health literacy will first need to be overcome.

Men's health literacy : advancing evidence and priorities

Men's health literacy and its bearing on health-related attitudes and behaviour are curiously absent from discussions on health literacy and men's health. This is perhaps understandable given the lack of a theoretical understanding and empirical evidence. In this article, we review and comment on the published literature addressing health literacy and men's health literacy. We define 'health literacy', note a silent discourse on gender in the international debate on health literacy and identify gaps addressing men's health literacy. We also raise issues for research priorities and the practical development and implementation of evidence-based policies and programs aimed at improving men's health.

Up to a quarter of the Australian population may have suboptimal health literacy depending upon the measurement tool : results from a population-based survey

The objective of this paper is to measure health literacy in a representative sample of the Australian general population using three health literacy tools; to consider the congruency of results; and to determine whether these assessments were associated with socio-demographic characteristics. Face-to-face interviews were conducted in a stratified random sample of the adult Victorian population identified from the 2004 Australian Government Electoral Roll. Participants were invited to participate by mail and follow-up telephone call. Health literacy was measured using the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM), Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (TOFHLA) and Newest Vital Sign (NVS). Of 1680 people invited to participate, 89 (5.3%) were ineligible, 750 (44.6%) were not contactable by phone, 531 (32%) refused and 310 (response rate 310/1591, 19.5%) agreed to participate. Compared with the general population, participants were slightly older, better educated and had a higher annual income. The proportion of participants with less than adequate health literacy levels varied: 26.0% (80/308) for the NVS, 10.6% (51 33/310) for the REALM and 6.8% (21/309) for the TOFHLA. A varying but significant proportion of the general population was found to have limited health literacy. The health literacy measures we used, while moderately correlated, appear to measure different but related constructs and use different cut offs to indicate poor health literacy.

Relevance of health literacy models for people with severe mental illness

People with severe mental illness experience elevated levels of impairment, morbidity and health-risk behaviours compared with the general population. Despite this, it is consistently reported that they do not visit health professionals, including preventative health professionals, as regularly as the general population. Their poor health suggests that current health promotion efforts have been largely ineffective in addressing their specific needs. Barriers that might explain this include lack of motivation, expense and lack of access. Health literacy is also a potentially important factor. As a part of a programme of work to develop appropriate and effective health promotion for this group, we have explored existing health-literacy models and their relevance to marginalized populations, in particular, people experiencing severe mental illness. A comprehensive search of the literature was undertaken. Models of health literacy identified were analyzed to determine the source population, underpinning theory/frameworks, supporting research evidence and to consider their potential generalisability. This paper presents an analysis of existing health-literacy models in the context of severe mental illness. We propose that because existing models of health literacy were developed through consultation with people experiencing challenges to specific health and social issues, for example, cancer, low income and limited education, this raises questions as to the applicability of these models to people experiencing severe and ongoing mental illness. Whilst such individuals were not actively excluded in the development of the existing models, we propose the development of an alternative model which considers this population's needs and limitations in accessing effective health-promotion campaigns/programs.

Critical appraisal of health literacy indices revealed variable underlying constructs, narrow content and psychometric weaknesses

Objective
Health literacy refers to an individual's ability to seek, understand, and use health information. A range of indices exist that purport to measure health literacy across individuals and populations. This study aimed to review the development and content of existing indices and to critically appraise their properties.

Study Design and Setting
Using standardized search terms, published generic health literacy indices (1990–2008) were identified. Using a methodological framework, each was evaluated for purpose, validity (face, content, construct), reliability, responsiveness, feasibility, and generalizability.

Results
Nineteen instruments were evaluated. Three measurement approaches were identified: direct testing of individual abilities, self-report of abilities, and population-based proxy measures. Composition of underlying constructs and content varied widely across instruments, and none appeared to fully measure a person's ability to seek, understand, and use health information. The content was focused primarily on reading comprehension and numeracy; scoring categories were poorly defined and may not be mutually exclusive, and few indices had been assessed for reliability.

Conclusion
Health literacy is not consistently measured, making it difficult to interpret and compare health literacy at individual and population levels. Empirical evidence demonstrating validity and reliability of existing indices is required, and more comprehensive health literacy instruments need to be developed.

Conceptualising health literacy from the patient perspective

Objective : A person's health literacy, i.e., their ability to seek, understand and use health information, is a critical determinant of whether they are able to actively participate in their healthcare. The objective of this study was to conceptualise health literacy from the patient perspective.

Methods : Using comprehensive qualitative methods 48 individuals were interviewed across three distinct groups in Australia: those with a chronic condition, the general community and individuals who had recently presented to a metropolitan public hospital emergency department. Purposeful sampling was employed to ensure a range of experiences was captured.

Results : Seven key abilities were identified: knowing when to seek health information; knowing where to seek health information; verbal communication skills; assertiveness; literacy skills; capacity to process and retain information; application skills.

Conclusion : This study identifies key abilities patients identified as critical to seek, understand and utilise information in the healthcare setting. These abilities are not reflected in existing measures for health literacy. Future measures of health literacy could consider incorporating abilities identified in this study and may provide guidance in developing health interventions to assist patients to participate effectively in their health.

Practice implications : More comprehensive measures to assess patient's health literacy are needed.

Health literacy : what is it and why is it important to measure?

This report summarizes the proceedings of the first Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Health Literacy Special Interest Group workshop at the OMERACT 10 conference. Health literacy refers to an individual’s capacity to seek, understand, and use health information. Discussion centered on the relevance of health literacy to the rheumatology field; whether measures of health literacy were important in the context of clinical trials and routine care; and, if so, whether disease-specific measures were required. A nominal group process involving 27 workshop participants, comprising a patient group (n = 12) and a healthcare professional and researcher group (n = 15), confirmed that health literacy encompasses a broad range of concepts and skills that existing scales do not measure. It identified the importance and relevance of patient abilities and characteristics, but also health professional factors and broader contextual factors. Sixteen themes were identified: access to information; cognitive capacity; disease; expression/communication; finances; health professionals; health system; information; literacy/numeracy; management skills; medication; patient approach; dealing with problems; psychological characteristics; social supports; and time. Each of these was divided further into subthemes of one or more of the following: knowledge, attitude, attribute, relationship, skill, action, or context. There were virtually no musculoskeletal-specific statements, suggesting that a generic health literacy tool in rheumatology is justified. The detailed concepts across themes provided new and systematic insight into what needs to be done to improve health literacy and consequently reduce health inequalities. These data will be used to derive a more comprehensive measure of health literacy.

Individuals with chronic low back pain have greater difficulty in engaging in positive lifestyle behaviours than those without back pain : an assessment of health literacy

Background: Despite the large volume of research dedicated to understanding chronic low back pain (CLBP), patient outcomes remain modest while healthcare costs continue to rise, creating a major public health burden. Health literacy - the ability to seek, understand and utilise health information - has been identified as an important factor in the course of other chronic conditions and may be important in the aetiology of CLBP. Many of the currently available health literacy measurement tools are limited since they measure narrow aspects of health literacy. The Health Literacy Measurement Scale (HeLMS) was developed recently to measure broader elements of health literacy. The aim of this study was to measure broad elements of health literacy among individuals with CLBP and without LBP using the HeLMS.
Methods: Thirty-six community-dwelling adults with CLBP and 44 with no history of LBP responded to the HeLMS. Individuals were recruited as part of a larger community-based spinal health study in Western Australia. Scores for the eight domains of the HeLMS as well as individual item responses were compared between the groups.
Results: HeLMS scores were similar between individuals with and without CLBP for seven of the eight health literacy domains (p > 0.05). However, compared to individuals with no history of LBP, those with CLBP had a significantly lower score in the domain ‘Patient attitudes towards their health’ (mean difference [95% CI]: 0.46 [0.11- 0.82]) and significantly lower scores for each of the individual items within this domain (p < 0.05). Moderate effect sizes ranged from d = 0.47-0.65.
Conclusions: Although no differences were identified in HeLMS scores between the groups for seven of the health literacy domains, adults with CLBP reported greater difficulty in engaging in general positive health behaviours. This aspect of health literacy suggests that self-management support initiatives may benefit individuals with CLBP.

Assessing health literacy : a new domain for collaboration between language testers and health professionals

Health literacy, defined as an individual's capacity to process health information in order to make appropriate health decisions, is the focus of increasing attention in medical fields due to growing awareness that suboptimal health literacy is associated with poorer health outcomes. To explore this issue, a number of instruments, reported to have high internal consistency and strong correlations with general literacy tests, have been developed. However, their validity as measures of the target construct is seldom explored using multiple sources of evidence. The current study, involving collaboration between health professionals and language specialists, set out to assess the validity of the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM), which describes itself as a “reading recognition” test that measures ability to pronounce common medical and lay terms. Drawing on a sample of 310 respondents, including both native and non-native speakers of English, investigations were undertaken to probe the REALM's validity as a measure of understanding the selected terms and to consider associations between scores on this widely used test and those derived from other recognized health literacy tests. Results suggest that the REALM is underrepresenting the health literacy construct and that the test may also be biased against non-native speakers of English. The study points to an expanded role for language testers, working in collaboration with experts from medical disciplines, in developing and evaluating health literacy tools.