文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
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
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
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 @ 2025

Ill Literates or Illiterates? Investigating the eHealth Literacy of Users of Online Health Communities.

作者信息

Petrič Gregor, Atanasova Sara, Kamin Tanja

机构信息

Centre for Methodology and Informatics, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.

Centre for Social Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2017 Oct 4;19(10):e331. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7372.


DOI:10.2196/jmir.7372
PMID:28978496
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5647457/
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Electronic health (eHealth) literacy is an important skill that allows patients to navigate intelligibly through the vast, often misleading Web-based world. Although eHealth literacy has been investigated in general and specific demographic populations, it has not yet been analyzed on users of online health communities (OHCs). Evidence shows that OHCs are important Web 2.0 applications for patients for managing their health, but at the same time, warnings have been expressed regarding the quality and relevance of shared information. No studies exist that investigate levels of eHealth literacy among users of OHCs and differences in eHealth literacy between different types of users. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to investigate eHealth literacy across different types of users of OHCs based on a revised and extended eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS). METHODS: The study was based on a cross-sectional Web survey on a simple random sample of 15,000 registered users of the most popular general OHC in Slovenia. The final sample comprised 644 users of the studied OHC. An extended eHEALS (eHEALS-E) was tested with factor analytical procedures, whereas user types were identified with a hierarchical clustering algorithm. The research question was analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedure and pairwise comparison tests. RESULTS: Factor analysis of the revised and extended eHEALS revealed six dimensions: awareness of sources, recognizing quality and meaning, understanding information, perceived efficiency, validating information, and being smart on the Net. The factor solution demonstrates a good fit to the data (root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA]=.059). The most developed dimension of eHEALS-E is awareness of different Internet sources (mean=3.98, standard deviation [SD]=0.61), whereas the least developed is understanding information (mean=3.11, SD=0.75). Clustering resulted in four user types: active help-seekers (48.3%, 311/644), lurkers (31.8%, 205/644), core relational users (16.9%, 109/644), and low-engaged users (3%, 19/644). Analysis of the research question showed statistically significant differences among user types across all six dimensions of eHEALS-E. Most notably, core relational users performed worse than lurkers on the validating information dimension (P=.01) and worse than active help-seekers on the being smart on the Net dimension (P=.05). Active help-seekers have the highest scores in all dimensions of the eHEALS-E, whereas low-engaged users have statistically significantly lower scores on all dimensions of the eHEALS-E in comparison with the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Those who are looking for advice and support in OHCs by making queries are well equipped with eHealth literacy skills to filter potential misinformation and detect bad advice. However, core relational users (who produce the most content in OHCs) have less-developed skills for cross-validating the information obtained and navigating successfully through the perils of the online world. Site managers should monitor their activity to avoid the spread of misinformation that might lead to unhealthy practices.

摘要

相似文献

[1]
Ill Literates or Illiterates? Investigating the eHealth Literacy of Users of Online Health Communities.

J Med Internet Res. 2017-10-4

[2]
Reliability and Validity of the Telephone-Based eHealth Literacy Scale Among Older Adults: Cross-Sectional Survey.

J Med Internet Res. 2017-10-26

[3]
Impact of Social Processes in Online Health Communities on Patient Empowerment in Relationship With the Physician: Emergence of Functional and Dysfunctional Empowerment.

J Med Internet Res. 2017-3-13

[4]
Correlation Between eHealth Literacy and Health Literacy Using the eHealth Literacy Scale and Real-Life Experiences in the Health Sector as a Proxy Measure of Functional Health Literacy: Cross-Sectional Web-Based Survey.

J Med Internet Res. 2018-10-31

[5]
Assessing Electronic Health Literacy in the State of Kuwait: Survey of Internet Users From an Arab State.

J Med Internet Res. 2019-5-24

[6]
Exploring the Measurement Properties of the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) Among Baby Boomers: A Multinational Test of Measurement Invariance.

J Med Internet Res. 2017-2-27

[7]
Electronic Health Literacy Across the Lifespan: Measurement Invariance Study.

J Med Internet Res. 2018-7-9

[8]
The Korean eHealth Literacy Scale (K-eHEALS): Reliability and Validity Testing in Younger Adults Recruited Online.

J Med Internet Res. 2018-4-20

[9]
eHealth Literacy and Health Behaviors Affecting Modern College Students: A Pilot Study of Issues Identified by the American College Health Association.

J Med Internet Res. 2017-12-19

[10]
Electronic Health Literacy in Swiss-German Parents: Cross-Sectional Study of eHealth Literacy Scale Unidimensionality.

J Med Internet Res. 2020-3-13

引用本文的文献

[1]
eHealth Literacy Assessment Instruments: Scoping Review.

J Med Internet Res. 2025-8-20

[2]
eHealth Literacy and Participation in Remote Blood Pressure Monitoring Among Patients With Hypertension: Cross-Sectional Study.

J Med Internet Res. 2025-7-31

[3]
Clusters of Patient Empowerment and Mental Health Literacy Differentiate Professional Help-Seeking Attitudes in Online Mental Health Communities Users.

Health Expect. 2025-2

[4]
The SoCAP (Social Communication, Affiliation, and Presence) Taxonomy of Social Features: Scoping Review of Commercially Available eHealth Apps.

J Med Internet Res. 2024-9-3

[5]
Validation of the extended e-health literacy scale: structural validity, construct validity and measurement invariance.

BMC Public Health. 2024-7-25

[6]
Electronic Health Literacy Scale-Web3.0 for Older Adults with Noncommunicable Diseases: Validation Study.

J Med Internet Res. 2024-6-3

[7]
Buffering against exposure to mental health misinformation in online communities on Facebook: the interplay of depression literacy and expert moderation.

BMC Public Health. 2023-8-18

[8]
The quality of informational social support in online health communities: A content analysis of cancer-related discussions.

Digit Health. 2023-2-20

[9]
Development and psychometric evaluation of a new brief scale to measure eHealth literacy in people with type 2 diabetes.

BMC Nurs. 2022-11-4

[10]
Digital Health Literacy During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Health Care Providers in Resource-Limited Settings: Cross-sectional Study.

JMIR Nurs. 2022-11-14

本文引用的文献

[1]
Exploring the benefits and challenges of health professionals' participation in online health communities: Emergence of (dis)empowerment processes and outcomes.

Int J Med Inform. 2017-2

[2]
Lessons Learned for Online Health Community Moderator Roles: A Mixed-Methods Study of Moderators Resigning From WebMD Communities.

J Med Internet Res. 2016-9-8

[3]
Personas in online health communities.

J Biomed Inform. 2016-10

[4]
Associations of eHealth Literacy With Health Behavior Among Adult Internet Users.

J Med Internet Res. 2016-7-18

[5]
Being an Informed Consumer of Health Information and Assessment of Electronic Health Literacy in a National Sample of Internet Users: Validity and Reliability of the e-HLS Instrument.

J Med Internet Res. 2016-7-11

[6]
Construct Validity of the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) Among Two Adult Populations: A Rasch Analysis.

JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2016-5-20

[7]
Answers to Health Questions: Internet Search Results Versus Online Health Community Responses.

J Med Internet Res. 2016-4-28

[8]
What is the Profile of Individuals Joining the KNEEguru Online Health Community? A Cross-Sectional Mixed-Methods Study.

J Med Internet Res. 2016-4-18

[9]
Website Sharing in Online Health Communities: A Descriptive Analysis.

J Med Internet Res. 2016-1-13

[10]
From Help-Seekers to Influential Users: A Systematic Review of Participation Styles in Online Health Communities.

J Med Internet Res. 2015-12-1

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索