The health literacy gap: what the evidence actually shows.

The most recent Australian survey that directly tested health literacy was conducted by the ABS in 2006. AIHW’s Australia’s Health 2018 still cites that survey as a reference point, which is important context: the evidence base is useful, but dated.

A later ABS Health Literacy Survey in 2018 used a different method: it asked people to self-assess health-literacy experiences rather than directly testing comprehension. Those results were more positive; for example, people with no selected chronic conditions reported that actively engaging with healthcare providers was always easy for 33.2% and usually easy for 56.9%.

Those two sources should not be blended as if they measure the same thing. Tested competency and self-perceived ease are both useful, but they answer different questions — and credible health content should be clear about that difference.

Red flag or green flag?

Click each example to compare risky communication patterns with more responsible alternatives.

Education versus medical advice: where the line sits.

General health education describes how something usually works, what options generally exist and where to find more information. It is appropriate for many health and wellness communicators.

Medical advice is personalised to an individual’s specific symptoms, history, risk factors and circumstances. It should come from a registered, qualified health practitioner.

A platform begins to move from education into advice territory when it tells an individual reader what they specifically should do, rather than explaining options generally.

Questions consumers ask about health education and support.