| Title |
Quick screen of patients' numeracy and document literacy skills: the factor structure of the Newest Vital Sign
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s165994 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yen-Ming Huang, Olayinka O Shiyanbola, Paul D Smith, Hsun-Yu Chan |
| Abstract |
The Newest Vital Sign (NVS) is a survey designed to measure general health literacy whereby an interviewer asks six questions related to information printed on a nutritional label from an ice cream container. It enables researchers to evaluate several health literacy dimensions in a short period of time, including document literacy, comprehension, quantitative literacy (numeracy), application, and evaluation. No study has empirically examined which items belong to which latent dimensions of health literacy in the NVS using factor analysis. Identifying the factor structure of the NVS would enable health care providers to choose appropriate intervention strategies to address patients' health literacy as well as improve their health outcomes accordingly. This study aimed to explore the factor structure of the NVS that is used to assess multiple dimensions of health literacy. A cross-sectional study administering the NVS in a face-to-face manner was conducted at two family medicine clinics in the USA. One hundred and seventy four individuals who participated were at least 20 years old, diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, prescribed at least one oral diabetes medicine, and used English as their primary language. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted to investigate the factor structure of the NVS. Numeracy and document literacy are two dimensions of health literacy that were identified and accounted for 63.05% of the variance in the NVS. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of the NVS were 0.78 and 0.91 for numeracy and document literacy, respectively. Numeracy and document literacy appropriately represent the factor structure of the NVS and may be used for assessing health literacy in greater detail for patients with type 2 diabetes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 20% |
| Unknown | 26 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 6% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 29 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 April 2020.
All research outputs
#8,595,692
of 25,523,622 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#640
of 1,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,584
of 339,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#17
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,523,622 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,766 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 339,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.