OBJECTIVE: To establish the reliability/validity of an 18-item test of patients' medical data interpretation skills. DESIGN: Survey with retest after 2 weeks. Subjects. 178 people recruited from advertisements in local newspapers, an outpatient clinic, and a hospital open house. RESULTS: The percentage of correct answers to individual items ranged from 20% to 87%, and medical data interpretation test scores (on a 0- 100 scale) were normally distributed (median 61.1, mean 61.0, range 6-94). Reliability was good (test-retest correlation=0.67, Cronbach's alpha=0.71). Construct validity was supported in several ways. Higher scores were found among people with highest versus lowest numeracy (71 v. 36, P<0.001), highest quantitative literacy (65 v. 28, P<0.001), and highest education (69 v. 42, P=0.004). Scores for 15 physician experts also completing the survey were significantly higher than participants with other postgraduate degrees (mean score 89 v. 69, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The medical data interpretation test is a reliable and valid measure of the ability to interpret medical statistics.
OBJECTIVE: To establish the reliability/validity of an 18-item test of patients' medical data interpretation skills. DESIGN: Survey with retest after 2 weeks. Subjects. 178 people recruited from advertisements in local newspapers, an outpatient clinic, and a hospital open house. RESULTS: The percentage of correct answers to individual items ranged from 20% to 87%, and medical data interpretation test scores (on a 0- 100 scale) were normally distributed (median 61.1, mean 61.0, range 6-94). Reliability was good (test-retest correlation=0.67, Cronbach's alpha=0.71). Construct validity was supported in several ways. Higher scores were found among people with highest versus lowest numeracy (71 v. 36, P<0.001), highest quantitative literacy (65 v. 28, P<0.001), and highest education (69 v. 42, P=0.004). Scores for 15 physician experts also completing the survey were significantly higher than participants with other postgraduate degrees (mean score 89 v. 69, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The medical data interpretation test is a reliable and valid measure of the ability to interpret medical statistics.
Authors: Tam H Nguyen; Hyunjeong Park; Hae-Ra Han; Kitty S Chan; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Jolie Haun; Miyong T Kim Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2015-07-29
Authors: Nikita Leiter; Melissa Motta; Robert M Reed; Temitope Adeyeye; Debra L Wiegand; Nirav G Shah; Avelino C Verceles; Giora Netzer Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Marilyn M Schapira; Kathlyn E Fletcher; Mary Ann Gilligan; Toni K King; Purushottam W Laud; B Alexendra Matthews; Joan M Neuner; Elisabeth Hayes Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2008 Jul-Aug