Source
Institute for Healthcare Studies, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. c-osborn@northwestern.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
To compare performance of the newest vital sign (NVS) with existing literacy measures.
METHODS:
We administered the NVS and REALM to 129 patients, and NVS and S-TOFHLA to 119 patients all in public clinics.
RESULTS:
The NVS demonstrated high sensitivity for detecting limited literacy and moderate specificity (area under the receiver operating characteristic [AUROC] curve 0.71-0.73). The NVS was less effective than the S-TOFHLA for predicting health outcomes.
CONCLUSION:
The NVS is able to identify patients with limited literacy skills, but may misclassify those with adequate literacy according to the REALM and S-TOFHLA. NVS scores were not associated with health outcomes.