ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2016
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.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
62 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review of the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of eHealth literacy in adult populations.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Factors influencing the e-health literacy in cancer patients: a systematic review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2023Pooled it
- Publicly Available, Interactive Web-Based Tools to Support Advance Care Planning: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Measuring health literacy: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis of instruments from 1993 to 2021.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- eHealth Literacy Instruments: Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- How Many Instruments Do We Need? Strengths, Weaknesses, and Potentials for Further Developments of Digital Health Literacy Measurement Instruments: Narrative Overview of Reviews and Content Analysis.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026Review
- The eHealth literacy and its sociodemographic determinants among adult inpatients in Web 3.0 context: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- [Relevance of eHealth Literacy (eHL) for Health Services Research and Practice - Part I].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2026Article
- Online Health Information Seeking for Pregnancy-Related Resources and Maternal eHealth Literacy Among Women in Thailand: A Qualitative Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Considering the impact of vaccine communication in the COVID-19 pandemic among adults in Canada: A qualitative study of lessons learned for future vaccine campaigns.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Validation of the Japanese eHealth Literacy Questionnaire Among Users in a Super-Aged Society: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The Adult Inpatient eHealth Literacy Scale (AIPeHLS): Development and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- eHealth Literacy Assessment Instruments: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- eHealth Literacy and Participation in Remote Blood Pressure Monitoring Among Patients With Hypertension: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Assessment of Telehealth Literacy in Users: Survey and Analysis of Demographic and Behavioral Determinants.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Patient Experiences of Integrative health CarE [PEICE]: A cross-sectional study.Integrative medicine research · 2025Article
- Development and Validation of the Media Health Literacy Scale: Assessment Tool Development Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Digital Health Literacy Questionnaire for Older Adults: Instrument Development and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- [Concept of Digital Health Literacy: A Scoping Review].Jugan geon-gang gwa jilbyeong · 2024Review
- Assessment of electronic health literacy and its association with self-management among gout patients: A cross-sectional study.Archives of rheumatology · 2024Article
2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Internet, with its capacity to provide information that transcends time and space barriers, continues to transform how people find and apply information to their own lives. With the current explosion in electronic sources of health information, including thousands of websites and hundreds of mobile phone health apps, electronic health literacy is gaining an increasing prominence in health and medical research. An important dimension of electronic health literacy is the ability to appraise the quality of information that will facilitate everyday health care decisions. Health information seekers explore their care options by gathering information from health websites, blogs, Web-based forums, social networking websites, and advertisements, despite the fact that information quality on the Internet varies greatly. Nonetheless, research has lagged behind in establishing multidimensional instruments, in part due to the evolving construct of health literacy itself.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to examine psychometric properties of a new electronic health literacy (ehealth literacy) measure in a national sample of Internet users with specific attention to older users. Our paper is motivated by the fact that ehealth literacy is an underinvestigated area of inquiry.
methodsOur sample was drawn from a panel of more than 55,000 participants maintained by Knowledge Networks, the largest national probability-based research panel for Web-based surveys. We examined the factor structure of a 19-item electronic Health Literacy Scale (e-HLS) through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency reliability, and construct validity on sample of adults (n=710) and a subsample of older adults (n=194). The AMOS graphics program 21.0 was used to construct a measurement model, linking latent factors obtained from EFA with 19 indicators to determine whether this factor structure achieved a good fit with our entire sample and the subsample (age ≥ 60 years). Linear regression analyses were performed in separate models to examine: (1) the construct validity of the e-HLS and (2) its association with respondents' demographic characteristics and health variables.
resultsThe EFA produced a 3-factor solution: communication (2 items), trust (4 items), and action (13 items). The 3-factor structure of the e-HLS was found to be invariant for the subsample. Fit indices obtained were as follows: full sample: χ(2) (710)=698.547, df=131, P<.001, comparative fit index (CFI)=0.94, normed fit index (NFI)=0.92, root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.08; and for the older subsample (age ≥ 60 years): χ(2) (194)=275.744, df=131, P<.001, CFI=0.95, NFI=0.90, RMSEA=0.08.
conclusionsThe analyses supported the e-HLS validity and internal reliability for the full sample and subsample. The overwhelming majority of our respondents reported a great deal of confidence in their ability to appraise the quality of information obtained from the Internet, yet less than half reported performing quality checks contained on the e-HLS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.