Development and Validation of a Literacy Assessment Tool for Persons With Diabetes

Abstract

PURPOSE

this research was conducted to develop a valid, reliable, quick, and nonstigmatizing tool for assessing literacy in the healthcare setting.

METHODS

The Literacy Assessment for Diabetes (LAD) instrument was developed as a word recognition test composed of 3 graded word lists in ascending difficulty. This literacy test, which was specific to diabetes, measured a patient's ability to pronounce terms that they would encounter during clinic visits and in reading menu and self-care instructions. The majority of the terms were on a 4th-grade reading level, with the remaining words ranging from the 6th- through 16th-grade levels. To assess reliability and validity, the LAD was compared with the Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT3) and the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM) by administering all 3 tests to 203 participants in a test-retest study design.

RESULTS

All 3 tests (LAD, REALM, and WRAT3) reliably detected true intrasubject variation in word recognition from test to retest. In addition, LAD measured word recognition ability similar to the REALM and WRAT3.

CONCLUSIONS

The LAD is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring literacy in adults with diabetes. It can be administered in 3 minutes or less, and the raw score is scaled to a reading grade level.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. Center for Health Care Strategies . Fact sheet. Functional Health Literacy: A Primer. Lawrenceville, NJ: Morley & Colella; 1997. No. 007.

2. Gazmararian JA , Baker DW , Williams MV , et al. Health literacy among medicare enrollees in a managed care organization. JAMA. 1999;281:545-551.

3. American Medical Association . Health literacy. Report of the Council on Scientific Affairs, AMA. JAMA. 1999;281: 552-556.

4. Kirsch IS , Jungeblut A , Jenkins L , Kilstad A . Adult Literacy in America: A First Look at the Results of the National Adult Literacy Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, US Dept of Education; 1993.

5. Parikh NS , Parker RM , Nurss JR , Baker DW , Williams MV . Shame and health literacy: the unspoken connection. Patient Educ Counsel. 1996;27:33-39.

6. Doak CC , Doak LG , Root JH . Teaching Patients With Low-Literacy Skills. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1996.

7. Davis TC , Michielutte R , Askov EN , Williams MV , Weiss BD . Practical assessment of adult literacy in health care. Health Educ Behav. 1998;25: 613-624.

8. Murphy PW , Davis TC , Decker BC , Jackson RH . Rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine: using a novel reading recognition test. J Reading. 1993;37:124-130.

9. Davis TC , Crouch MA , Long SW , et al. Rapid assessment of literacy levels of adult primary care patients. Fam Med. 1991;23:433-435.

10.

10. Davis TC , Long SW , Jackson RH , et al. Rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine: a shortened screening instrument. Fam Med. 1993;25: 391-395.

11.

11. Taylor W . Cloze procedure: a new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Q. 1953;30: 415-433.

12.

12. Baker DW , Williams MV , Parker RM , Gazmararian JA , Nurss JR . Development of a brief test to measure functional health literacy. Patient Educ Counsel. 1999;38:33-42.

13.

13. Dale E , O'Rourke J . The Living Word Vocabulary: The Words We Know. Elgin, III: Dome; 1976.

14.

14. Scott J , McCleary S . Diagnostic Reading Inventory for Primary and Intermediate Grades. Akron, Ohio: Scott & McCleary Publishing Co; 1993.

15.

15. Davis TC , Mayeaux EJ , Fredrickson D , Bocchini J , Jackson R , Murphy P . Reading ability of parents compared with reading level of pediatric patient education materials. Pediatrics. 1994;93:460-468.