Yunyao Deng#, Gang Xiao#, Ninglei Li, Kun Zhou, Mei Peng, Lixin Liu*


Department of General Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 51000, China 


Materials and methods: (1) Colorectal cancer health literacy scale was developed. Through literature search, expert interviews, medical expert consultation and small sample pre-investigation, a colorectal cancer health literacy assessment prescale was formed, and the preliminary verification of the scale was completed; (2) The reliability and validity of the scale was analyzed. Conveniently selected 30 colorectal cancer patients, completed item analysis and exploratory factor analysis on the colorectal cancer health literacy assessment prescale, screened out the scale items, and conveniently selected 100 colorectal cancer patients to complete the reliability and validity of the formal scale Evaluation.

Results: 2 expert letter inquiries were completed, and the positive coefficients of expert letter inquiries were both 100.00%. The expert's judgment coefficient is 0.86, the familiarity is 0.80%, and the expert's authority coefficient is 0.87. The prepared scale has a total of 46 items; the final remaining items in the construct validity are 12 months, and the factor analysis is completed, and the cumulative variance contribution rate of the three factors is 78.726%; the correlation coefficient between the dimensions of the scale is 0.475-0.754 , the correlation coefficient between the scores of each dimension and the total score is 0.632-0.941, and each dimension has a positive correlation with the total scale (P<0.05). , 0.856, 0.731; the overall test-retest reliability was 0.938, and the test-retest reliability of each dimension was 0.923, 0.921, and 0.934, respectively. 

Conclusion: The colorectal cancer health literacy scale was successfully developed and validated, and it has good reliability and validity, and can be used as an effective and feasible measurement tool.


Colorectal cancer, health literacy scale, reliability and validity, expert interview, expert consultation.