Limits...
Aging and Functional Health Literacy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Kobayashi LC, Wardle J, Wolf MS, von Wagner C - J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci (2014)

Bottom Line: Older age was strongly associated with limited health literacy in analyses that measured health literacy as reading comprehension, reasoning, and numeracy skills (random-effects odds ratio [OR] = 4.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.13-5.64).By contrast, older age was weakly associated with limited health literacy in studies that measured health literacy as medical vocabulary (random-effects OR = 1.19; 95% CI: 1.03-1.37).Vocabulary-based health literacy skills appear more stable with age.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, UK. l.kobayashi.12@ucl.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.


Forest plot of random-effects pooled odds ratios for the association between older age and limited health literacy, stratified by health literacy test.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4834761&req=5

Figure 2: Forest plot of random-effects pooled odds ratios for the association between older age and limited health literacy, stratified by health literacy test.

Mentions: The meta-analysis of 29 individual analyses gave an overall fixed-effects OR of 2.33 (95% CI: 2.12–2.56) for the association between older age and limited health literacy. The Q value was 274.68 (df = 28; p < .0001) and I2 statistic was 89.81, indicating that significant heterogeneity within the fixed-effects results and that results from the random-effects model (OR = 2.56; 95% CI: 1.85–3.53) are appropriate for interpretation. Within studies using the S-TOFHLA/TOFHLA, the fixed-effects OR was 4.44 (95% CI: 3.89–5.06). The Q value was 77.70 (df = 18; p < .0001) and I2 statistic was 76.83, indicating significant heterogeneity and that results from the random-effects model (OR = 4.20; 95% CI: 3.13–5.64) are again appropriate for interpretation. Within studies using the REALM, the fixed-effects OR was 1.20 (95% CI: 1.05–1.37), with a Q value of 9.40 (df = 9; p = .40) and I2 statistic of 4.26, indicating that heterogeneity may not be important. The random-effects OR was 1.19 (95% CI: 1.03–1.37). In this instance, the fixed- and random-effects ORs were negligibly different; we select the random-effects OR for interpretation to be conservative and consistent with reporting. Figure 2 shows a forest plot and individual study statistics for the random-effects meta-analyses.


Aging and Functional Health Literacy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Kobayashi LC, Wardle J, Wolf MS, von Wagner C - J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci (2014)

Forest plot of random-effects pooled odds ratios for the association between older age and limited health literacy, stratified by health literacy test.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4834761&req=5

Figure 2: Forest plot of random-effects pooled odds ratios for the association between older age and limited health literacy, stratified by health literacy test.
Mentions: The meta-analysis of 29 individual analyses gave an overall fixed-effects OR of 2.33 (95% CI: 2.12–2.56) for the association between older age and limited health literacy. The Q value was 274.68 (df = 28; p < .0001) and I2 statistic was 89.81, indicating that significant heterogeneity within the fixed-effects results and that results from the random-effects model (OR = 2.56; 95% CI: 1.85–3.53) are appropriate for interpretation. Within studies using the S-TOFHLA/TOFHLA, the fixed-effects OR was 4.44 (95% CI: 3.89–5.06). The Q value was 77.70 (df = 18; p < .0001) and I2 statistic was 76.83, indicating significant heterogeneity and that results from the random-effects model (OR = 4.20; 95% CI: 3.13–5.64) are again appropriate for interpretation. Within studies using the REALM, the fixed-effects OR was 1.20 (95% CI: 1.05–1.37), with a Q value of 9.40 (df = 9; p = .40) and I2 statistic of 4.26, indicating that heterogeneity may not be important. The random-effects OR was 1.19 (95% CI: 1.03–1.37). In this instance, the fixed- and random-effects ORs were negligibly different; we select the random-effects OR for interpretation to be conservative and consistent with reporting. Figure 2 shows a forest plot and individual study statistics for the random-effects meta-analyses.

Bottom Line: Older age was strongly associated with limited health literacy in analyses that measured health literacy as reading comprehension, reasoning, and numeracy skills (random-effects odds ratio [OR] = 4.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.13-5.64).By contrast, older age was weakly associated with limited health literacy in studies that measured health literacy as medical vocabulary (random-effects OR = 1.19; 95% CI: 1.03-1.37).Vocabulary-based health literacy skills appear more stable with age.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Health Behaviour Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, UK. l.kobayashi.12@ucl.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.