MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283369041 · doi:10.3390/ijerph19137669

Measuring Health Literacy in Primary Healthcare: Adaptation and Validation of a French-Language Version of the Brief Health Literacy Screening among Patients with Chronic Conditions Seen in Primary Care

2022· article· en· W4283369041 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Maud‐Christine Chouinard, Mireille Lambert, Mélissa Lavoie, Sylvie Lambert, Émilie Hudon, Olivier Dumont‐Samson, Catherine Hudon

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de Montréal
FundersRéseau de recherche portant sur les interventions en sciences infirmières du Québec
KeywordsHealth literacyAdaptation (eye)LiteracyPrimary carePrimary health careHealth careMedicinePsychologyFamily medicineEnvironmental healthPolitical sciencePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Brief Health Literacy Screening (BHLS) is a short self-report instrument developed to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. This study aimed to translate the BHLS into French Canadian (BHLS-FCv) and to evaluate its psychometric properties among patients with chronic conditions in primary care. METHODS: The BHLS was translated into French using the Hawkins and Osborne's method. Content validity was evaluated through cognitive interviews. A validation study of the BHLS-FCv was conducted in two primary care clinics in the province of Quebec (Canada) among adult patients with chronic conditions. Psychometric properties evaluated included: internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha); test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient); and concurrent validity (Spearman's correlations with the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ)). RESULTS: 178 participants completed the questionnaire at baseline and 47 completed the questionnaire two weeks later over the telephone. The average score was 13.3. Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency was 0.77. The intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability was 0.69 (95% confidence interval: 0.45-0.83). Concurrent validity with Spearman's correlation coefficient with three subscales of HLQ ranged from 0.28 to 0.58. CONCLUSIONS: The BHLS-FCv demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties and could be used in a population with chronic conditions in primary care.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207