A theory-based self-report measure of health literacy: The Calgary Charter on Health Literacy scale
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We set out to test a theory-based measure of health literacy. To do so, we included the newly developed Calgary Charter on Health Literacy scale in Pre- and Post-evaluation of the Life Enhancement Program at multiple sites. The program focusing on health literacy and the prevention of chronic disease is conducted with health-care provider organization partners across the United States. In testing the reliability and validity of the new measure of health literacy, Cronbach’s alpha is very acceptable level at 0.80. There are numerous statistically significant correlations between the change in health literacy and participants’ changes in knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, and health status. Data and analysis indicate that the Calgary Charter on Health Literacy Scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool in the contexts and with the populations they were tested within. More testing is necessary and warranted in a wider variety of contexts and populations—ideally to include large representative random samples and comparison groups. We recommend that policymakers increase focus on advancing health literacy as an evidence-based approach to reach the goals of improved individual and public health at a lower cost.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.052 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it