Limits...
Understanding health literacy measurement through eye tracking.

Mackert M, Champlin SE, Pasch KE, Weiss BD - J Health Commun (2013)

Bottom Line: The authors recruited 25 university administrative staff (more likely to have adequate health literacy skills) and 25 adults enrolled in an adult literacy program (more likely to have limited health literacy skills).The authors used computerized eye-tracking technology to measure the amount of time each participant spent fixing their view at nutrition label information that was relevant to the questions being asked and the amount of time they spent viewing nonrelevant information.Results showed that lower NVS scores were significantly associated with more time spent on information not relevant for answering the NVS items.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: a Department of Advertising and Public Relations , The University of Texas at Austin , Austin , Texas , USA.

ABSTRACT
This study used eye-tracking technology to explore how individuals with different levels of health literacy visualize health-related information. The authors recruited 25 university administrative staff (more likely to have adequate health literacy skills) and 25 adults enrolled in an adult literacy program (more likely to have limited health literacy skills). The authors administered the Newest Vital Sign (NVS) health literacy assessment to each participant. The assessment involves having individuals answer questions about a nutrition label while viewing the label. The authors used computerized eye-tracking technology to measure the amount of time each participant spent fixing their view at nutrition label information that was relevant to the questions being asked and the amount of time they spent viewing nonrelevant information. Results showed that lower NVS scores were significantly associated with more time spent on information not relevant for answering the NVS items. This finding suggests that efforts to improve health literacy measurement should include the ability to differentiate not just between individuals who have difficulty interpreting and using health information, but also between those who have difficulty finding relevant information. In addition, this finding suggests that health education material should minimize the inclusion of nonrelevant information.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

The Newest Vital Sign (NVS) Measure of Health Literacy: Relevant and nonrelevant information details on the NVS nutrition label deemed relevant for answering each of the six NVS questions are highlighted in gray. Details that are not relevant for answering NVS items are shown on the label in white.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3814999&req=5

Figure 2: The Newest Vital Sign (NVS) Measure of Health Literacy: Relevant and nonrelevant information details on the NVS nutrition label deemed relevant for answering each of the six NVS questions are highlighted in gray. Details that are not relevant for answering NVS items are shown on the label in white.

Mentions: The 18 AOIs were then coded as containing “relevant” or “nonrelevant” pieces of information based on whether the AOI element being viewed was needed to answer any of the six questions used in the NVS health literacy assessment (Figure 2). For example, on the NVS nutrition label, the “calories” information is needed to answer the first NVS question, and would therefore be coded as relevant information. In contrast, there is no NVS question asking about dietary fiber and the “dietary fiber” element on the NVS nutrition label would be coded as “nonrelevant.” Coding the pieces of health information on the NVS nutrition label in this way allowed us to examine whether individuals with different levels of literacy skill spent more time looking at information that is relevant vs. not relevant to a given task.


Understanding health literacy measurement through eye tracking.

Mackert M, Champlin SE, Pasch KE, Weiss BD - J Health Commun (2013)

The Newest Vital Sign (NVS) Measure of Health Literacy: Relevant and nonrelevant information details on the NVS nutrition label deemed relevant for answering each of the six NVS questions are highlighted in gray. Details that are not relevant for answering NVS items are shown on the label in white.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3814999&req=5

Figure 2: The Newest Vital Sign (NVS) Measure of Health Literacy: Relevant and nonrelevant information details on the NVS nutrition label deemed relevant for answering each of the six NVS questions are highlighted in gray. Details that are not relevant for answering NVS items are shown on the label in white.
Mentions: The 18 AOIs were then coded as containing “relevant” or “nonrelevant” pieces of information based on whether the AOI element being viewed was needed to answer any of the six questions used in the NVS health literacy assessment (Figure 2). For example, on the NVS nutrition label, the “calories” information is needed to answer the first NVS question, and would therefore be coded as relevant information. In contrast, there is no NVS question asking about dietary fiber and the “dietary fiber” element on the NVS nutrition label would be coded as “nonrelevant.” Coding the pieces of health information on the NVS nutrition label in this way allowed us to examine whether individuals with different levels of literacy skill spent more time looking at information that is relevant vs. not relevant to a given task.

Bottom Line: The authors recruited 25 university administrative staff (more likely to have adequate health literacy skills) and 25 adults enrolled in an adult literacy program (more likely to have limited health literacy skills).The authors used computerized eye-tracking technology to measure the amount of time each participant spent fixing their view at nutrition label information that was relevant to the questions being asked and the amount of time they spent viewing nonrelevant information.Results showed that lower NVS scores were significantly associated with more time spent on information not relevant for answering the NVS items.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: a Department of Advertising and Public Relations , The University of Texas at Austin , Austin , Texas , USA.

ABSTRACT
This study used eye-tracking technology to explore how individuals with different levels of health literacy visualize health-related information. The authors recruited 25 university administrative staff (more likely to have adequate health literacy skills) and 25 adults enrolled in an adult literacy program (more likely to have limited health literacy skills). The authors administered the Newest Vital Sign (NVS) health literacy assessment to each participant. The assessment involves having individuals answer questions about a nutrition label while viewing the label. The authors used computerized eye-tracking technology to measure the amount of time each participant spent fixing their view at nutrition label information that was relevant to the questions being asked and the amount of time they spent viewing nonrelevant information. Results showed that lower NVS scores were significantly associated with more time spent on information not relevant for answering the NVS items. This finding suggests that efforts to improve health literacy measurement should include the ability to differentiate not just between individuals who have difficulty interpreting and using health information, but also between those who have difficulty finding relevant information. In addition, this finding suggests that health education material should minimize the inclusion of nonrelevant information.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus