Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22052161›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2011

Effects of an eHealth literacy intervention for older adults.

Bo Xie

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 99 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
99citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04960917 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Development and Implementation of eHealth Literacy Workshops in the Community

TypeinterventionalSponsorHadassah Medical OrganizationRan2021 to 2025Enrolled200ConditionsHealth LiteracyArmsEvaluation of ehealth literacy workshop
NCT06374576 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Improving eHealth Literacy of Older Adults in Hong Kong: A Randomized Controlled Trial Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe University of Hong KongRan2024 to 2024Enrolled93ConditionseHealth LiteracyArmsLecture on eHealth literacy, Digital intervention on eHealth literacy, Lecture on general health, Digital intervention on general health
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

99 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Remote Usability Testing and Satisfaction with a Mobile Health Medication Inquiry System in CKD.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2015
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. eHealth Literacy Interventions: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

39 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Bo XieUniversity of Maryland, College of Information Studies, College Park, MD 20740, United States. boxie@umd.edu

Funding

Improving Older Adults' E-Health Literacy With Collaborative Versus IndividualistR01AG041284 · NIA · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI XIE, BO · 2011 to 2013
$876k
NIA NIH HHS 1R01AG041284-01NIA NIH HHS R01 AG041284
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlder 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.

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

methodsThe 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).

resultsOverall, 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.

conclusionsThe 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.

Indexed as

Computer LiteracyHealth LiteracyTelemedicineAgedAged, 80 and overAttitude to ComputersCooperative BehaviorFemaleHumansInternetLearningLibrariesMaleMarylandMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID22052161
PMCPMC3222191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.