MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414473078 · doi:10.3390/healthcare13192410

Developing a Health System Literacy Measure for Chinese Immigrants in Canada: Adapting the HLS19–NAV Scale

2025· article· en· W4414473078 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anh Thu Vo, Ying Cao, Lixia Yang, Robin Urquhart, Yanqing Yi, Peter Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioToronto Metropolitan UniversityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoNova Scotia Health AuthorityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilMemorial University of NewfoundlandBeatrice Hunter Cancer Research Institute
KeywordsHealth literacyLikert scaleScale (ratio)Structural equation modelingDiscriminant validityLiteracyConfirmatory factor analysisConstruct validityImmigrationHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Health system literacy is crucial for immigrants to navigate health care systems and access necessary services. Little is known about how well immigrants understand and use the healthcare system in Canada. This study aimed to adapt and validate a health system literacy scale for the Canadian context (HSL-CAN). Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted from March 11 to July 19, 2024, among Chinese individuals aged 30 or older who have lived in Canada for at least 6 months. The HSL-CAN was developed through a literature review, patient and provider consultation, and adaptation of the European Health Literacy Population Survey 2019–2021 for navigational health literacy measurement (HLS19–NAV) and was then translated into simplified and traditional Chinese. Content validity was evaluated via stakeholders’ feedback, and structural validity was evaluated via exploratory and confirmatory analyses (EFA/CFA). Convergent and discriminant validity, as well as known-group validity, were tested using correlations with the HLS19-SF12, ANOVA (or t-test), and effect size. Internal consistency was measured with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and composite reliability. Results: Initially, HSL-CAN contained 25 items developed using a five-point Likert response scale. Some minor revisions were made according to the stakeholders’ feedback (n = 12). Five redundancy items were removed based on the EFA. CFA supported a one-factor model with good fit indices (CFI = 0.960, TLI = 0.955, SRMR = 0.033, RMSEA = 0.025), χ2/df = 1.41). The scale showed a solid internal reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.81; composite reliability = 0.812). The HSL-CAN is highly correlated with the “health care” construct but lowly with the “health prevention and promotion” construct of HLS19–SF12. Known-group validity showed large mean differences by education, income, and non-cancer chronic comorbidities and small to moderate mean differences by gender, age groups, employment status, self-rated health, and assistance needed to see a healthcare provider. Conclusions: The HSL-CAN is the first validated instrument to evaluate health system literacy in the Chinese population in Canada. Given strong validity and reliability, the instrument can be useful for research and practice, although further refinement is recommended before using this scale on the general population in Canada.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcareSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207