@article{OkanBollwegBerensetal., author = {Okan, Orkan and Bollweg, Torsten Michael and Berens, Eva-Maria and Hurrelmann, Klaus and Bauer, Ullrich and Schaeffer, Doris}, title = {Coronavirus-Related Health Literacy: A Cross-Sectional Study in Adults during the COVID-19 Infodemic in Germany}, series = {International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health}, volume = {17}, journal = {International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health}, number = {15}, doi = {10.3390/ijerph17155503}, abstract = {There is an "infodemic" associated with the COVID-19 pandemic—an overabundance of valid and invalid information. Health literacy is the ability to access, understand, appraise, and apply health information, making it crucial for navigating coronavirus and COVID-19 information environments. A cross-sectional representative study of participants ≥ 16 years in Germany was conducted using an online survey. A coronavirus-related health literacy measure was developed (HLS-COVID-Q22). Internal consistency was very high (α = 0.940; ρ = 0.891) and construct validity suggests a sufficient model fit, making HLS-COVID-Q22 a feasible tool for assessing coronavirus-related health literacy in population surveys. While 49.9\% of our sample had sufficient levels of coronavirus-related health literacy, 50.1\% had "problematic" (15.2\%) or "inadequate" (34.9\%) levels. Although the overall level of health literacy is high, a vast number of participants report difficulties dealing with coronavirus and COVID-19 information. The participants felt well informed about coronavirus, but 47.8\% reported having difficulties judging whether they could trust media information on COVID-19. Confusion about coronavirus information was significantly higher among those who had lower health literacy. This calls for targeted public information campaigns and promotion of population-based health literacy for better navigation of information environments during the infodemic, identification of disinformation, and decision-making based on reliable and trustworthy information.}, language = {en} } @article{OkanBollwegBaueretal., author = {Okan, Orkan and Bollweg, Torsten Michael and Bauer, Ullrich and Hurrelmann, Klaus and Schaeffer, Doris}, title = {Coronaspezifische Gesundheitskompetenz zu drei Messzeitpunkten}, series = {Public Health Forum}, volume = {30}, journal = {Public Health Forum}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1515/pubhef-2022-0031}, pages = {131 -- 134}, abstract = {Die coronaspezifische Gesundheitskompetenz der Bev{\"o}lkerung in Deutschland lag im Jahr 2020 zwischen 34,8\% und 50,1\%, wobei sie sich im Jahresverlauf signifikant verbessert hatte. Einem großen Teil der Bev{\"o}lkerung f{\"a}llt es nicht immer leicht, mit Gesundheitsinformationen zu Covid-19 umzugehen, so wie es die hier beschriebene HLS-Covid-19 Studie zur coronaspezifischen Gesundheitskompetenz aufzeigt. Die gr{\"o}ßte Herausforderung stellt das Beurteilen von Informationen dar. Die Ergebnisse deuten zudem auf einen sozialen Gradienten f{\"u}r niedrige coronaspezifische Gesundheitskompetenz hin.}, language = {de} } @article{BauerDierksHurrelmannetal., author = {Bauer, Ullrich and Dierks, Marie-Luise and Hurrelmann, Klaus and Kickbusch, Ilona and Melin, Susanne and Orkan, Okan and Pelikan, J{\"u}rgen and Schaeffer, Doris and Schmidt-Kaehler, Sebastian and S{\o}rensen, Kristine}, title = {Deutschland braucht mehr Gesundheitskompetenz}, series = {Gesundheitswesen}, volume = {2022}, journal = {Gesundheitswesen}, number = {84}, doi = {10.1055/a-1801-6880}, pages = {415 -- 418}, language = {de} } @article{WeishaarHurrelmannOkanetal., author = {Weishaar, Heide and Hurrelmann, Klaus and Okan, Orkan and Horn, Annett and Schaeffer, Doris}, title = {Framing health literacy: A comparative analysis of national action plans}, series = {Health Policy}, volume = {123}, journal = {Health Policy}, number = {1}, issn = {0168-8510}, doi = {10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.11.012}, pages = {11 -- 20}, abstract = {Population and individual deficits in health literacy, and their associated negative health outcomes, have received growing attention in the political arena in recent years. In order to respond to the problem, several governments have adopted national action plans, which outline strategies to improve health literacy. Drawing on the action plans of the USA, Australia, Scotland, and Wales and applying Entman's concept of framing, this paper analyses how health literacy debates are framed within the political arena as well as the factors that influence framing. Analysing data from policy documents and in-depth expert interviews, this paper identifies relevant frames developed to (i) define the problem of limited health literacy, (ii) provide causal explanations, (iii) rationalise why health literacy requires political action, and (iv) present solutions. The findings indicate that the malleability of the concept allows that a diversity of frames and solutions are promoted, yet risks that debates remain vague. Health literacy seems to have been successfully used to instigate political debates about health system reforms, patient empowerment, and shared decision making. The analysis suggests that health literacy might, if applied strategically, help to focus policy debates on key public health problems and the development of systemic solutions.}, language = {en} }