Papers
Xiao-xiao WANG, Meng ZHANG, Jia-yu ZHU, Ci-xin WANG, Cheng-jia SHEN, Yan-xun CAI, Qin-yu LYU, Guo-qiang LU, Zheng-hui YI
Objective: To revise the Chinese version of the Mental Health Literacy Scale (MHLS) and validate its reliability and validity, aiming to develop a measurement tool suitable for assessing mental health literacy in the Chinese population. Methods: A convenience sampling method was employed to collect valid data from 341 community residents via the Wenjuanxing online survey platform between Oct 2019 and Apr 2020. The measurement instruments included the MHLS, the Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire (SCSQ), the Self Help Strategies for Subclinical Depression (SHS), the Help-Seeking Questionnaire (HSQ), the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7 (GAD-7). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were employed to examine the scale's reliability and validity. Internal consistency and stability were assessed using Cronbach's α and test-retest reliability, while construct validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and criterion-related validity were evaluated to verify the psychometric properties. Results: EFA extracted five common factors: disease knowledge, information-seeking, attitudes toward mental illness, attitudes toward help-seeking, and stigma, with a cumulative variance explanation rate of 43.297%. CFA indicated a good fit for the five-factor model (χ2/df=1.754), comparative fit index (CFI) was 0.903, incremental fit index (IFI) was 0.905, goodness-of-fit index (GFI) was 0.884, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.047, and root mean square residual (RMR) was 0.053. The Cronbach's α coefficients for the total scale and subscales ranged from 0.701 to 0.877, and test-retest reliability ranged from 0.617 to 0.882 (P < 0.01). Additionally, the total score of the MHLS showed significant positive correlations with the positive coping subscale of the SCSQ (r=0.213, P < 0.01), the HSQ score (r=0.248, P < 0.01), and the SHS score (r=0.302, P < 0.01), demonstrating good criterion-related validity. The results of group difference analysis revealed that males, individuals with lower educational attainment, and those without prior mental health knowledge training exhibited significantly lower levels of mental health literacy compared with other demographic groups. Conclusion: The Chinese version of the MHLS demonstrates good reliability and validity in a Chinese sample, serving as a scientific measurement tool for assessing individual mental health literacy and providing insights into the public's understanding of mental health. Additionally, it is recommended to enhance mental health awareness among males and individuals with lower educational attainment through multi-channel educational initiatives.