Assesses health literacy related to physical activity in college students, suggesting a new assessment tool for health promotion.
Background Declining physical fitness among college students has become a global public health concern. Existing physical literacy and health literacy instruments do not adequately capture the competencies required to access, interpret, and critically evaluate physical activity–related health information in contemporary digital environments. Objective This study aimed to develop and psychometrically validate the Physical Activity and Health Literacy Scale (PA‐HLS) for college students based on Nutbeam’s hierarchical model of health literacy. Methods An initial item pool was generated through a systematic literature review and refined via two rounds of Delphi expert consultation ( n = 19) and pilot testing ( n = 30). The final 15‐item PA‐HLS was administered to 442 Chinese college students. Psychometric evaluation included content validity assessment, item analysis, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω), discriminant validity testing, and Rasch model analysis. Results All items demonstrated good discrimination (critical ratios = 6.74–31.90, p < 0.001) and strong factor loadings (0.59–0.93). Content validity was excellent (I‐CVI = 1.00; S‐CVI = 1.00). Exploratory factor analysis supported a three‐factor structure explaining 77.1% of the total variance, which was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis with acceptable model fit. Internal consistency was high for the total scale ( α = 0.892; ω = 0.869) and all subscales. Rasch analysis further supported the scale’s measurement quality. Conclusion The PA‐HLS is a theoretically grounded and psychometrically robust instrument for assessing physical activity–related health literacy among college students and may inform targeted health promotion interventions in university settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Duan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: