| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 University of Arizona College of Medicine, Department of Family and Community Medicine, Tucson, Ariz
2 College of Nursing, Arizona State University, Tempe, Ariz
3 Department of Internal Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Barry D. Weiss, MD, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine, 1450 North Cherry Ave, Tucson, AZ 85719, bdweiss{at}u.arizona.edu
PURPOSE Current health literacy screening instruments for health care settings are either too long for routine use or available only in English. Our objective was to develop a quick and accurate screening test for limited literacy available in English and Spanish.
METHODS We administered candidate items for the new instrument and also the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (TOFHLA) to English-speaking and Spanish-speaking primary care patients. We measured internal consistency with Cronbach’s 
and assessed criterion validity by measuring correlations with TOFHLA scores. Using TOFLHA scores <75 to define limited literacy, we plotted receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves and calculated likelihood ratios for cutoff scores on the new instrument.
RESULTS The final instrument, the Newest Vital Sign (NVS), is a nutrition label that is accompanied by 6 questions and requires 3 minutes for administration. It is reliable (Cronbach >0.76 in English and 0.69 in Spanish) and correlates with the TOFHLA. Area under the ROC curve is 0.88 for English and 0.72 for Spanish versions. Patients with more than 4 correct responses are unlikely to have low literacy, whereas fewer than 4 correct answers indicate the possibility of limited literacy.
CONCLUSION NVS is suitable for use as a quick screening test for limited literacy in primary health care settings.
Key Words: Literacy • health literacy • physician-patient communication • Spanish
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. G. Ryan, F. Leguen, B. D. Weiss, S. Albury, T. Jennings, F. Velez, and N. Salibi Will patients agree to have their literacy skills assessed in clinical practice? Health Educ. Res., August 1, 2008; 23(4): 603 - 611. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Y. Ibrahim, F. Reid, A. Shaw, G. Rowlands, G. B. Gomez, M. Chesnokov, and M. Ussher Validation of a Health Literacy Screening Tool (REALM) in a UK Population with coronary heart disease J. Public Health Med., July 31, 2008; (2008) fdn059v2. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Pleasant and S. Kuruvilla A tale of two health literacies: public health and clinical approaches to health literacy Health Promot. Int., June 1, 2008; 23(2): 152 - 159. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 V. L. Tkacz, A. Metzger, and M. C. Pruchnicki Health literacy in pharmacy Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., May 15, 2008; 65(10): 974 - 981. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Johnson and B. D. Weiss How Long Does It Take to Assess Literacy Skills in Clinical Practice? J Am Board Fam Med, May 1, 2008; 21(3): 211 - 214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L K. Hironaka and M. K Paasche-Orlow The implications of health literacy on patient-provider communication Arch. Dis. Child., May 1, 2008; 93(5): 428 - 432. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. v. Wagner, K. Knight, A. Steptoe, and J. Wardle Functional health literacy and health-promoting behaviour in a national sample of British adults J. Epidemiol. Community Health, December 1, 2007; 61(12): 1086 - 1090. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. C. Stange In This Issue: Trade-Offs, Time Use, Depression Care Ann. Fam. Med, November 1, 2005; 3(6): 482 - 483. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
Read all TRACK Comments
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
