Zur Kurzanzeige

Assessing Electronic Health Literacy in Individuals With the Post–COVID-19 Condition Using the German Revised eHealth Literacy Scale

Validation Study

dc.contributor.authorMarsall, Matthias
dc.contributor.authorDinse, Hannah
dc.contributor.authorSchröder, Julia
dc.contributor.authorSkoda, Eva-Maria
dc.contributor.authorTeufel, Martin
dc.contributor.authorBäuerle, Alexander
dc.date.accessioned2025-10-21T13:19:53Z
dc.date.available2025-10-21T13:19:53Z
dc.date.issued25.04.2024
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11811/13559
dc.description.abstractBackground: The eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) is a widely used instrument for measuring eHealth literacy (eHL). However, little is known so far about whether the instrument is valid for the assessment of eHL in persons who are affected by the post–COVID-19 condition. This is particularly important as people with the post–COVID-19 condition are frequently affected by false information from the internet.
Objective: The objective of our study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of the German Revised eHealth Literacy Scale (GR-eHEALS) in individuals with the post–COVID-19 condition.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted from January to May 2022. The self-assessment survey consisted of the GR-eHEALS, health status– and internet use–related variables, sociodemographic data, and (post)–COVID-19–related medical data. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), correlational analyses, and tests of measurement invariance were deployed.
Results: In total, 330 participants were included in the statistical analyses. CFA revealed that the 2-factor model reached an excellent model fit (comparative fit index=1.00, Tucker–Lewis index=0.99, root mean square error of approximation=0.036, standardized root mean square residual=0.038). Convergent validity was confirmed by significant positive correlations between eHL and knowledge of internet-based health promotion programs, experience in using these programs, and the duration of private internet use. In addition, a significantly negative relationship of eHL with internet anxiety supported convergent validity. Further, significant relationships of eHL with mental health status and internal health locus of control confirmed the criterion validity of the instrument. However, relationships of eHL with physical health status and quality of life could not be confirmed. The 2-factor model was fully measurement invariant regarding gender. Regarding age and educational level, partial measurement invariance was confirmed. The subscales as well as the overall GR-eHEALS reached good-to-excellent reliability (Cronbach α≥.86).
Conclusions: The GR-eHEALS is a reliable and largely valid instrument for assessing eHL in individuals with the post–COVID-19 condition. Measurement invariance regarding gender was fully confirmed and allows the interpretation of group differences. Regarding age and educational level, group differences should be interpreted with caution. Given the high likelihood that individuals with the post–COVID-19 condition will be confronted with misinformation on the Internet, eHL is a core competency that is highly relevant in this context, in both research and clinical practice. Therefore, future research should also explore alternative instruments to capture eHL to overcome shortcomings in the validity of the GR-eHEALS.
en
dc.format.extent14
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsNamensnennung 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjecteHealth literacy
dc.subjecteHEALS
dc.subjectfactor analysis
dc.subjectmeasurement invariance
dc.subjectpsychometric properties
dc.subjectinfodemic
dc.subject.ddc610 Medizin, Gesundheit
dc.titleAssessing Electronic Health Literacy in Individuals With the Post–COVID-19 Condition Using the German Revised eHealth Literacy Scale
dc.title.alternativeValidation Study
dc.typeWissenschaftlicher Artikel
dc.publisher.nameJMIR Publications
dc.publisher.locationToronto
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccess
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume2024, vol. 8
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.issue52189
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pagestart1
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pageend14
dc.relation.doihttps://doi.org/10.2196/52189
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitleJMIR formative research
ulbbn.pubtypeZweitveröffentlichung
dc.versionpublishedVersion
ulbbn.sponsorship.oaUnifundOA-Förderung Universität Bonn


Dateien zu dieser Ressource

Thumbnail

Das Dokument erscheint in:

Zur Kurzanzeige

Die folgenden Nutzungsbestimmungen sind mit dieser Ressource verbunden:

Namensnennung 4.0 International