Challenging a Statistic: Why should we accept that 60 percent of adult Australians have low health literacy?

S. Black
{"title":"Challenging a Statistic: Why should we accept that 60 percent of adult Australians have low health literacy?","authors":"S. Black","doi":"10.5130/LNS.V24I1.4901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper briefly considers Australia’s only national health survey published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in 2008 which has been widely referenced within the health sector. The main issue discussed is the use of a criterion level (level 3) to determine the point below which nearly 60 percent of Australian adults can be considered to have inadequate health literacy. The argument is made that this criterion level is arbitrary and statistically unjustified, yet it serves the purpose of presenting health literacy as a ‘crisis’ demanding action, which in turn represents the interests of dominant groups in this globalised, neo-liberal era.","PeriodicalId":52030,"journal":{"name":"Literacy and Numeracy Studies","volume":"8 1","pages":"65-74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Literacy and Numeracy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5130/LNS.V24I1.4901","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper briefly considers Australia’s only national health survey published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in 2008 which has been widely referenced within the health sector. The main issue discussed is the use of a criterion level (level 3) to determine the point below which nearly 60 percent of Australian adults can be considered to have inadequate health literacy. The argument is made that this criterion level is arbitrary and statistically unjustified, yet it serves the purpose of presenting health literacy as a ‘crisis’ demanding action, which in turn represents the interests of dominant groups in this globalised, neo-liberal era.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
挑战一项统计数据:为什么我们要接受60%的澳大利亚成年人健康素养较低的事实?
本文简要考虑了澳大利亚统计局(ABS)在2008年发布的澳大利亚唯一的全国健康调查,该调查已在卫生部门广泛引用。讨论的主要问题是使用标准级别(3级)来确定低于该级别的近60%的澳大利亚成年人可被视为卫生知识普及不足。有人认为,这一标准水平是武断的,在统计上是不合理的,然而,它的目的是将卫生素养作为一种要求采取行动的“危机”,这反过来又代表了这个全球化的新自由主义时代主导群体的利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Literacy and Numeracy Studies
Literacy and Numeracy Studies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊最新文献
Handbook of Literacy in Diglossia and in Dialectal Contexts TRANSFORMING PRACTICE THROUGH AN UNDERSTANDING OF SOCIO – CULTURAL CONDITIONS IN THE CLASSROOM Human-Animal Relationships in Literacy Education The Cognitive Foundations of Reading and Its Acquisition Numeracy as Social Practice: Global and Local Perspectives
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1