Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Measurement Variation Across Health Literacy Assessments: Implications for Assessment Selection in Research and Practice

Haun, Jolie, Luther, Stephen, Dodd, Virginia, Donaldson, Patricia·2012·Journal of Health Communication

Abstract

National priorities and recent federal initiatives have brought health literacy to the forefront in providing safe accessible care. Having valid and reliable health literacy measures is a critical factor in meeting patients' health literacy needs. In this study, the authors examined variation across three brief health literacy instruments in categorizing health literacy levels and identifying associated factors. The authors screened 378 veterans using the short form of the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults; the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine; and a 4-Item Brief Health Literacy Screening Tool (known as the BRIEF). They analyzed data using prevalence estimates, Pearson product moment correlations, and logistic regression. When categorizing individuals' health literacy, agreement among instruments was present for 37% of the sample. There were consistencies; however, categorization and estimated risk factors varied by instrument. Depending on instrument, increased age, low education, minority status, and self-reported poor reading level were associated with low health literacy. Findings suggest that these instruments measure health literacy differently and are likely conceptually different. As the use of health literacy screening gains momentum, alignment between instrument and intended purpose is essential; in some cases, multiple instruments may be appropriate. When selecting an instrument, one should consider style of administration, purpose for measure, and availability of time and resources.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10810730.2012.712615

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Cited by

See all 295

Metadata

Authors
Haun, J., Luther, S., Dodd, V., & Donaldson, P.
Venue
Journal of Health Communication
Published
2012-10
Volume
17
Issue
sup3
Pages
141-159
ISSN
  • 1081-0730 (ISSN-L)
  • 1087-0415
OpenAlex
W2041773052
Cited by
295
References
37
FWCI
11.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Measurement Variation Across Health Literacy Assessments: Implications for Assessment Selection in Research and Practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10810730.2012.712615
The paper
Haun, J., Luther, S., Dodd, V., & Donaldson, P. (2012). Measurement Variation Across Health Literacy Assessments: Implications for Assessment Selection in Research and Practice. Journal of Health Communication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2012.712615

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.