Background and Objective. Efficiency in scale design reduces respondent burden. A brief but reliable measure of numeracy may provide a useful research tool eligible for integration into large epidemiological studies or clinical trials. Our goal was to validate a 3-item version of the Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS-3). Design and Setting. We examined 7 separate cross-sectional data sets: patients in the emergency department (n = 208), clinic (n = 205), and hospital (n = 460; n = 2053) and patients with chronic kidney disease (n = 147), with diabetes (n = 318), and on hemodialysis (n = 143). Measurements: Internal reliability of the SNS-3 was assessed with Cronbach’s α. Criterion validity was determined by nonparametric correlations of the SNS-3 with SNS-8 and other measures of numeracy; construct validity was determined by correlations with measures of health literacy and education. Results: The SNS-3 had good internal reliability (median Cronbach’s α = 0.78) and correlated highly with the full SNS (median ρ = 0.91). The SNS-3 was significantly correlated with other measures of numeracy (e.g., median ρ = 0.57 with the Wide Range Achievement Test 4), health literacy (e.g., median ρ = 0.35 with the Shortened Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults), and education (median ρ = 0.41), providing good evidence of criterion and construct validity. Conclusion: The SNS-3 is sufficiently reliable and valid to be used as a measure of subjective numeracy.
AndersonBLSchulkinJ. Physicians’ perceptions of patients’ knowledge and opinions regarding breast cancer: associations with patient education and physician numeracy. Breast Care (Basel). 2011;6(4):285–8.
2.
SchapiraMMFletcherKEGilliganMA. A framework for health numeracy: how patients use quantitative skills in health care. J Health Commun. 2008;13(5):501–17.
3.
DavidsSLSchapiraMMMcAuliffeTLNattingerAB. Predictors of pessimistic breast cancer risk perceptions in a primary care population. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19(4):310–5.
4.
SchapiraMMDavidsSLMcAuliffeTLNattingerAB. Agreement between scales in the measurement of breast cancer risk perceptions. Risk Anal. 2004;24(3):665–73.
5.
SchwartzLMWoloshinSBlackWCWelchHG. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(11):966–72.
6.
RothmanRLMontoriVMCherringtonAPignoneMP. Perspective: the role of numeracy in health care. J Health Commun. 2008;13(6):583–95.
7.
FagerlinAZikmund-FisherBJUbelPAJankovicADerryHASmithDM. Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale. Med Decis Making. 2007;27(5):672–80.
8.
Zikmund-FisherBJSmithDMUbelPAFagerlinA. Validation of the Subjective Numeracy Scale: effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Med Decis Making. 2007;27(5):663–71.
9.
McNaughtonCWallstonKARothmanRLMarcovitzDEStorrowAB. Short, subjective measures of numeracy and general health literacy in an adult emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2011;18(11):1148–55.
10.
WilkersonGSRobertsonGJ. WRAT4 Wide Range Achievement Test Professional Manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2006.
11.
DavisTCLongSWJacksonRH. Rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine: a shortened screening instrument. Fam Med. 1993;25(6):391–5.
12.
BakerDWWilliamsMVParkerRMGazmararianJANurssJ. Development of a brief test to measure functional health literacy. Patient Educ Couns. 1999;38(1):33–42.
13.
ChewLDBradleyKABoykoEJ. Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. Fam Med. 2004;36(8):588–94.
14.
ChewLDGriffinJMPartinMR. Validation of screening questions for limited health literacy in a large VA outpatient population. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(5):561–6.
15.
McNaughtonCRothmanRStorrowAWallstonK. Measuring numeracy and health literacy in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2014;21(8):944–5.
16.
LipkusIMSamsaGRimerBK. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Making. 2001;21(1):37–44.
17.
OsbornCYWallstonKAShpigelACavanaughKKripalaniSRothmanRL. Development and validation of the General Health Numeracy Test (GHNT). Patient Educ Couns. 2013;91(3):350–6.
18.
ParkerRMBakerDWWilliamsMVNurssJR. The test of functional health literacy in adults: a new instrument for measuring patients’ literacy skills. J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10(10):537–41.
19.
HuizingaMMElasyTAWallstonKA. Development and validation of the Diabetes Numeracy Test (DNT). BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8:96.
20.
WhiteROEdenSWallstonKA. Health communication, self-care, and treatment satisfaction among low-income diabetes patients in a public health setting. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98(2):144–9.
21.
WallstonKACawthonCMcNaughtonCDRothmanRLOsbornCYKripalaniS. Psychometric properties of the Brief Health Literacy Screen in clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;1:119–26.
22.
MeyersAGSalanitroAWallstonKA. Determinants of health after hospital discharge: rationale and design of the Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study (VICS). BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:10.
