Hey Janet,
I found the article that you described to be particularly interesting and relevant to my own interests and experiences. The SAHL instrument is something that would have been very useful during a past experience I had at the UC Davis student-run clinics. I had interacted with a patient who had bravely expressed to me that he had never learned to read. The papers that I intended to give him upon his exit would have been useless! I was able to work through the documents with him, but there was a significant amount of time dedicated to explaining medical concepts.
The SAHL article led me to think of the utility of such an instrument, and I can imagine that a new patient in a clinic could complete a version of the instrument that may help inform physicians about appropriate methods of explaining their findings and recommendations. Thinking of my own research interests in neurodegenerative disease, I have spoken previously in the forum about the frequent desire from patients to understand what is happening to them or their loved one, and because the exact causes are still unknown, it is tempting to dive into the scientific minutia within the literature to find a suitable explanation. If the SAHL was used, perhaps we would have a better idea of what the patient may begin thinking about when relevant terminology is used, and we could then come up with a way to explain the concepts that are suitable to the patients level of understanding and conceptual frameworks.
Regarding the implications of measurement quality, I would be initially concerned about upsetting a patient with a “test” of their medical literacy if they were incorrectly deemed to be in need of such a test. Furthermore, I would be careful to generalize findings from one patient to the next, because I would guess that medical literacy and understanding is highly dependent on unique factors within one’s life. For example, perhaps an expert of some trade would be highly educated, but simply not in medical terminology. Elsewhere, perhaps an individual with little to no formal education works closely with the health system, and therefore knows much more than most. Altogether, I think the SAHL is an exciting instrument, and it would be worthwhile to give many different individuals an opportunity to complete. I expect that the more we know about the way people from different backgrounds think about medical terminology, the more likely we would be to construct a tailored method of explanation for each individual that maximized their understanding and positive outcomes.
Great find!
I found the article that you described to be particularly interesting and relevant to my own interests and experiences. The SAHL instrument is something that would have been very useful during a past experience I had at the UC Davis student-run clinics. I had interacted with a patient who had bravely expressed to me that he had never learned to read. The papers that I intended to give him upon his exit would have been useless! I was able to work through the documents with him, but there was a significant amount of time dedicated to explaining medical concepts.
The SAHL article led me to think of the utility of such an instrument, and I can imagine that a new patient in a clinic could complete a version of the instrument that may help inform physicians about appropriate methods of explaining their findings and recommendations. Thinking of my own research interests in neurodegenerative disease, I have spoken previously in the forum about the frequent desire from patients to understand what is happening to them or their loved one, and because the exact causes are still unknown, it is tempting to dive into the scientific minutia within the literature to find a suitable explanation. If the SAHL was used, perhaps we would have a better idea of what the patient may begin thinking about when relevant terminology is used, and we could then come up with a way to explain the concepts that are suitable to the patients level of understanding and conceptual frameworks.
Regarding the implications of measurement quality, I would be initially concerned about upsetting a patient with a “test” of their medical literacy if they were incorrectly deemed to be in need of such a test. Furthermore, I would be careful to generalize findings from one patient to the next, because I would guess that medical literacy and understanding is highly dependent on unique factors within one’s life. For example, perhaps an expert of some trade would be highly educated, but simply not in medical terminology. Elsewhere, perhaps an individual with little to no formal education works closely with the health system, and therefore knows much more than most. Altogether, I think the SAHL is an exciting instrument, and it would be worthwhile to give many different individuals an opportunity to complete. I expect that the more we know about the way people from different backgrounds think about medical terminology, the more likely we would be to construct a tailored method of explanation for each individual that maximized their understanding and positive outcomes.
Great find!