Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Journal of Medical I...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Article . 2025 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
PubMed Central
Conference object . 2025
License: CC BY
Data sources: PubMed Central
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

eHealth Literacy Assessment Instruments: Scoping Review

Authors: Chen Wang; Luoyuan Chang; Xindou Chen; Jingqi Kong; Huiying Qi;

eHealth Literacy Assessment Instruments: Scoping Review

Abstract

Abstract Background eHealth literacy is a necessary competency for individuals to achieve health self-management in the digital age, and the evaluation of eHealth literacy is an important foundation for clarifying individual eHealth literacy levels and implementing eHealth behavior interventions. Objective This study reviews the research progress of eHealth literacy assessment instruments to offer suggestions for further development and improvement as well as to provide a reference to eHealth intervention. Methods We reviewed papers on Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and EBSCO in English between 2006 and 2024 and included studies involving the development of eHealth literacy assessment instruments, which must be published in peer-reviewed journals. An analysis in terms of the development process, instrument characteristics, and assessment themes was conducted to reveal the content, features, and application of currently available eHealth literacy assessment instruments. Results Searches yielded 2972 studies, of which 13 studies were included in the final analysis. The analysis of the 13 studies indicated that the development of instruments is improving constantly, as the concept of eHealth literacy evolves. In total, 9 of the 13 tools are subjective assessments, with eHealth Literacy Scale being the most widely used. In contrast, the remaining 4 comprehensive assessment tools incorporate objective evaluation criteria. The 13 instruments’ reliability ranged from 0.52 to 0.976. Validity was reported for 12 tools (excluding eHealth Literacy Scale), covering 5 types: content validity, structural validity, discriminant validity, external validity, and convergent validity. Regarding assessment themes, skill factors are involved in many instruments, but psychology factors and information factors are less concerned. Conclusions The evaluation of the characteristics of existing eHealth literacy assessment tools in this paper can provide a reference for the selection of assessment tools. Overall, subjective and comprehensive assessment tools for eHealth literacy have their own advantages and disadvantages. Subjective assessment tools have a friendly evaluation method, but their test validity is relatively low. There is a risk of time-consuming and low recognition for comprehensive evaluation tools. Future research should be based on the deepening of eHealth literacy connotation, further verifying the effectiveness of existing eHealth literacy assessment tools and adding objective evaluation dimensions.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Humans, Review, Telemedicine, Health Literacy

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    5
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
5
Top 10%
Average
Top 10%
Green
gold