• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Effects of an eHealth literacy intervention for older adults.针对老年人的电子健康素养干预措施的效果
J Med Internet Res. 2011 Nov 3;13(4):e90. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1880.
2
Individualistic Versus Collaborative Learning in an eHealth Literacy Intervention for Older Adults: Quasi-Experimental Study.老年人电子健康素养干预中的个体学习与协作学习:准实验研究
JMIR Aging. 2023 Feb 9;6:e41809. doi: 10.2196/41809.
3
Assessing the Effects of eHealth Tutorials on Older Adults' eHealth Literacy.评估电子健康教程对老年人电子健康素养的影响。
J Appl Gerontol. 2022 Jul;41(7):1675-1685. doi: 10.1177/07334648221088281. Epub 2022 Apr 24.
4
Evaluating a theory-based intervention for improving eHealth literacy in older adults: a single group, pretest-posttest design.评估基于理论的干预措施对提高老年人电子健康素养的效果:单组前后测设计。
BMC Geriatr. 2022 Nov 29;22(1):918. doi: 10.1186/s12877-022-03545-y.
5
Internet use, eHealth literacy and attitudes toward computer/internet among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders: a cross-sectional study in two distant European regions.精神分裂症谱系障碍患者的互联网使用、电子健康素养及对计算机/互联网的态度:在两个遥远欧洲地区开展的横断面研究
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017 Sep 20;17(1):136. doi: 10.1186/s12911-017-0531-4.
6
Relationship Between Coronavirus-Related eHealth Literacy and COVID-19 Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices among US Adults: Web-Based Survey Study.美国成年人中与冠状病毒相关的电子健康素养与COVID-19知识、态度和行为之间的关系:基于网络的调查研究
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Mar 29;23(3):e25042. doi: 10.2196/25042.
7
Older Adult Internet Use and eHealth Literacy.老年人的互联网使用与电子健康素养。
J Appl Gerontol. 2020 Feb;39(2):141-150. doi: 10.1177/0733464818807468. Epub 2018 Oct 24.
8
eHealth literacy and Web 2.0 health information seeking behaviors among baby boomers and older adults.婴儿潮一代和老年人的电子健康素养与Web 2.0健康信息搜索行为
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Mar 17;17(3):e70. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3992.
9
E-health literacy and associated factors among chronic patients in a low-income country: a cross-sectional survey.电子健康素养与低收入国家慢性病患者的相关因素:一项横断面调查。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020 Aug 6;20(1):181. doi: 10.1186/s12911-020-01202-1.
10
eHEALS: The eHealth Literacy Scale.eHEALS:电子健康素养量表。
J Med Internet Res. 2006 Nov 14;8(4):e27. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8.4.e27.

引用本文的文献

1
eHealth Literacy Interventions: Scoping Review.电子健康素养干预措施:范围综述
Interact J Med Res. 2025 Aug 22;14:e69640. doi: 10.2196/69640.
2
eHealth Literacy Interventions With U.S.-Based Older Adult Spanish-Speaking Latinos: An Empty Systematic Review.针对美国讲西班牙语的老年拉丁裔人群的电子健康素养干预措施:一项空洞的系统评价。
Innov Aging. 2025 May 6;9(6):igaf042. doi: 10.1093/geroni/igaf042. eCollection 2025.
3
ehealth use and psychological health improvement among older adults: The sequential mediating roles of social support and self-esteem.老年人的电子健康使用与心理健康改善:社会支持和自尊的顺序中介作用。
Digit Health. 2025 Jun 6;11:20552076251346659. doi: 10.1177/20552076251346659. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
4
eHealth literacy and cancer screening attitudes among chronic patients.慢性病患者的电子健康素养与癌症筛查态度
Sci Rep. 2025 May 29;15(1):18877. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-03595-3.
5
Exploring the impact of internet use on cognitive abilities in the older adults: evidence from the CHARLS 2020 database.探究互联网使用对老年人认知能力的影响:来自中国健康与养老追踪调查(CHARLS)2020数据库的证据
Front Public Health. 2025 Feb 18;13:1510418. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1510418. eCollection 2025.
6
Preferences of community-dwelling older adults with multimorbidity for digital empowerment interventions: Protocol for a discrete choice experiment study.患有多种疾病的社区老年人对数字赋权干预措施的偏好:一项离散选择实验研究的方案
Digit Health. 2025 Feb 25;11:20552076251319662. doi: 10.1177/20552076251319662. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
7
Development and effectiveness evaluation of an interactive e-learning environment to enhance digital health literacy in cancer patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.开发并评估用于提高癌症患者数字健康素养的交互式电子学习环境的有效性:一项随机对照试验的研究方案
Front Digit Health. 2025 Jan 24;7:1455143. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2025.1455143. eCollection 2025.
8
Effectiveness of eHealth literacy interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies.电子健康素养干预措施的有效性:对实验研究的系统评价和荟萃分析
BMC Public Health. 2025 Jan 23;25(1):288. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-21354-x.
9
Health and eHealth Literacy of Patients With Diabetes in Low-Income Countries: Perspective From Guinea and Burkina Faso.低收入国家糖尿病患者的健康与电子健康素养:来自几内亚和布基纳法索的视角
JMIR Diabetes. 2024 Dec 3;9:e55677. doi: 10.2196/55677.
10
Exploring Social Support Strategies and Socio-Cultural Factors Influencing Social Isolation and Loneliness: The Role of Digital Literacy.探索影响社会隔离和孤独感的社会支持策略及社会文化因素:数字素养的作用
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Oct 29;12(21):2149. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12212149.

本文引用的文献

1
Improving older adults' e-health literacy through computer training using NIH online resources.通过使用美国国立卫生研究院在线资源进行计算机培训来提高老年人的电子健康素养。
Libr Inf Sci Res. 2012 Jan 1;34(1):63-71. doi: 10.1016/j.lisr.2011.07.006. Epub 2011 Dec 7.
2
Gender differences in older adults' everyday cognitive collaboration.老年人日常认知协作中的性别差异。
Int J Behav Dev. 2002 Jan;26(1):45-59. doi: 10.1080/01650250143000319.
3
Public library computer training for older adults to access high-quality Internet health information.为老年人提供公共图书馆计算机培训,以获取高质量的互联网健康信息。
Libr Inf Sci Res. 2009 Sep 1;31(3):155. doi: 10.1016/j.lisr.2009.03.004.
4
Older adults' health information wants in the internet age: implications for patient-provider relationships.互联网时代老年人的健康信息需求:对医患关系的影响。
J Health Commun. 2009 Sep;14(6):510-24. doi: 10.1080/10810730903089614.
5
The effects of an engaged lifestyle on cognitive vitality: a field experiment.积极生活方式对认知活力的影响:一项现场实验。
Psychol Aging. 2008 Dec;23(4):778-86. doi: 10.1037/a0014341.
6
Integrated review of health literacy interventions.健康素养干预措施的综合综述
Orthop Nurs. 2008 Sep-Oct;27(5):302-17. doi: 10.1097/01.NOR.0000337283.55670.75.
7
A multilevel modeling approach to examining individual differences in skill acquisition for a computer-based task.一种用于研究基于计算机任务的技能习得中个体差异的多层次建模方法。
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2007 Jun;62 Spec No 1(SPEC):85-96. doi: 10.1093/geronb/62.special_issue_1.85.
8
Developing context and background underlying cognitive intervention/training studies in older populations.梳理老年人群认知干预/训练研究的背景和相关情况。
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2007 Jun;62 Spec No 1:5-10. doi: 10.1093/geronb/62.special_issue_1.5.
9
Exploration of the construct of reliance among patients who talk with their providers about internet information.对与医疗服务提供者谈论互联网信息的患者之间依赖关系的探究。
J Health Commun. 2007 Jan-Feb;12(1):17-28. doi: 10.1080/10810730601091318.
10
eHEALS: The eHealth Literacy Scale.eHEALS:电子健康素养量表。
J Med Internet Res. 2006 Nov 14;8(4):e27. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8.4.e27.

针对老年人的电子健康素养干预措施的效果

Effects of an eHealth literacy intervention for older adults.

作者信息

Xie Bo

机构信息

University of Maryland, College of Information Studies, College Park, MD 20740, United States.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2011 Nov 3;13(4):e90. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1880.

DOI:10.2196/jmir.1880
PMID:22052161
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3222191/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Older adults generally have low health and computer literacies, making it challenging for them to function well in the eHealth era where technology is increasingly being used in health care. Little is known about effective interventions and strategies for improving the eHealth literacy of the older population.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine the effects of a theory-driven eHealth literacy intervention for older adults.

METHODS

The experimental design was a 2 × 2 mixed factorial design with learning method (collaborative; individualistic) as the between-participants variable and time of measurement (pre; post) as the within-participants variable. A total of 146 older adults aged 56-91 (mean 69.99, SD 8.12) participated in this study during February to May 2011. The intervention involved 2 weeks of learning about using the National Institutes of Health's SeniorHealth.gov website to access reliable health information. The intervention took place at public libraries. Participants were randomly assigned to either experimental condition (collaborative: n = 72; individualistic: n = 74).

RESULTS

Overall, participants' knowledge, skills, and eHealth literacy efficacy all improved significantly from pre to post intervention (P < .001 in all cases; effect sizes were >0.8 with statistical power of 1.00 even at the .01 level in all cases). When controlling for baseline differences, no significant main effect of the learning method was found on computer/Web knowledge, skills, or eHealth literacy efficacy. Thus, collaborative learning did not differ from individualistic learning in affecting the learning outcomes. No significant interaction effect of learning method and time of measurement was found. Group composition based on gender, familiarity with peers, or prior computer experience had no significant main or interaction effect on the learning outcomes. Regardless of the specific learning method used, participants had overwhelmingly positive attitudes toward the intervention and reported positive changes in participation in their own health care as a result of the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide strong evidence that the eHealth literacy intervention tested in this study, regardless of the specific learning method used, significantly improved knowledge, skills, and eHealth literacy efficacy from pre to post intervention, was positively perceived by participants, and led to positive changes in their own health care. Collaborative learning did not differ from individualistic learning in affecting the learning outcomes, suggesting the previously widely reported advantages of collaborative over individualistic learning may not be easily applied to the older population in informal settings, though several confounding factors might have contributed to this finding (ie, the largely inexperienced computer user composition of the study sample, potential instructor effect, and ceiling effect). Further research is necessary before a more firm conclusion can be drawn. These findings contribute to the literatures on adult learning, social interdependence theory, and health literacy.

摘要

背景

老年人通常健康素养和计算机素养较低,这使得他们在电子健康时代难以良好地发挥作用,因为在这个时代,技术在医疗保健中的应用越来越广泛。关于提高老年人群体电子健康素养的有效干预措施和策略,人们知之甚少。

目的

本研究的目的是检验一种理论驱动的针对老年人的电子健康素养干预措施的效果。

方法

实验设计为2×2混合因子设计,学习方法(协作式;个人式)为组间变量,测量时间(干预前;干预后)为组内变量。2011年2月至5月期间,共有146名年龄在56 - 91岁(平均69.99岁,标准差8.12)的老年人参与了本研究。干预措施包括为期2周的学习如何使用美国国立卫生研究院的SeniorHealth.gov网站获取可靠的健康信息。干预在公共图书馆进行。参与者被随机分配到两种实验条件之一(协作式:n = 72;个人式:n = 74)。

结果

总体而言,参与者的知识、技能和电子健康素养效能在干预前后均有显著提高(所有情况下P <.001;效应量均>0.8,即使在.01水平,统计功效也为1.00)。在控制基线差异后,未发现学习方法对计算机/网络知识、技能或电子健康素养效能有显著的主效应。因此,协作式学习与个人式学习在影响学习成果方面没有差异。未发现学习方法和测量时间的显著交互效应。基于性别、与同伴的熟悉程度或先前计算机经验的分组对学习成果没有显著的主效应或交互效应。无论使用何种具体的学习方法,参与者对干预措施的态度总体上都是积极的,并报告称由于干预,他们在参与自身医疗保健方面有积极变化。

结论

研究结果提供了有力证据,表明本研究中测试的电子健康素养干预措施,无论使用何种具体学习方法,从干预前到干预后都显著提高了知识、技能和电子健康素养效能,受到参与者的积极认可,并导致他们在自身医疗保健方面产生积极变化。协作式学习与个人式学习在影响学习成果方面没有差异,这表明先前广泛报道的协作式学习相对于个人式学习的优势可能不容易应用于非正式环境中的老年人群体,尽管可能有几个混杂因素导致了这一结果(即研究样本中计算机用户大多缺乏经验、潜在的教师效应和天花板效应)。在得出更确凿的结论之前,有必要进行进一步的研究。这些发现为成人学习、社会相互依存理论和健康素养的文献做出了贡献。