Performance-Based Measurement of eHealth Literacy: Systematic Scoping Review

Abstract

Background

eHealth literacy describes the ability to locate, comprehend, evaluate, and apply web-based health information to a health problem. In studies of eHealth literacy, researchers have primarily assessed participants’ perceived eHealth literacy using a short self-report instrument, for which ample research has shown little to no association with actual performed eHealth-related skills. Performance-based measures of eHealth literacy may be more effective at assessing actual eHealth skills, yet such measures seem to be scarcer in the literature.

Objective

The primary purpose of this study was to identify tools that currently exist to measure eHealth literacy based on objective performance. A secondary purpose of this study was to characterize the prevalence of performance-based measurement of eHealth literacy in the literature compared with subjective measurement.

Methods

We conducted a systematic scoping review of the literature, aligning with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist, in 3 stages: conducting the search, screening articles, and extracting data into a summary table. The summary table includes terminology for eHealth literacy, description of participants, instrument design, health topics used, and a brief note on the evidence of validity for each performance-based measurement tool. A total of 1444 unique articles retrieved from 6 relevant databases (MEDLINE; PsycINFO; CINAHL; Library and Information Science Abstracts [LISA]; Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts [LISTA]; and Education Resources Information Center [ERIC]) were considered for inclusion, of which 313 (21.68%) included a measure of eHealth literacy.

Results

Among the 313 articles that included a measure of eHealth literacy, we identified 33 (10.5%) that reported on 29 unique performance-based eHealth literacy measurement tools. The types of tools ranged from having participants answer health-related questions using the internet, having participants engage in simulated internet tasks, and having participants evaluate website quality to quizzing participants on their knowledge of health and the web-based health information–seeking process. In addition, among the 313 articles, we identified 280 (89.5%) that measured eHealth literacy using only a self-rating tool.

Conclusions

This study is the first research synthesis looking specifically at performance-based measures of eHealth literacy and may direct researchers toward existing performance-based measurement tools to be applied in future projects. We discuss some of the key benefits and drawbacks of different approaches to performance-based measurement of eHealth literacy. Researchers with an interest in gauging participants’ actual eHealth literacy (as opposed to perceived eHealth literacy) should make efforts to incorporate tools such as those identified in this systematic scoping review.