ArticleAtencion primaria2018
[Use of new technologies by adolescents in the search for health information].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adolescents' use of an online Q&A service to enhance their oral health literacy: a mixed-methods text mining and thematic analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Advancing adolescent health promotion in the digital era.Health promotion international · 2025Review
- Assessing Motivations and Channels for Nutritional Information Verification in Spanish University Communities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Perception of Internet Use in Relation to Health Decision-Making among Nursing Students.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2023Article
- Antibiotic Infographics Available on the Internet: Documentary Quality, Purpose, and Appropriateness as Educational Tools on Antimicrobial Resistance.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe Internet sources used by adolescents to consult health information and their sociodemographic characteristics, as well as to identify the variables that influence the choice of Internet site.
designCross-sectional descriptive study. Survey adapted from the questionnaire validated by Rideout. PARTICIPANTS AND LOCATION: Adolescents aged 12-18 from 4schools in rural municipalities.
resultsThe study included a total of 405 adolescents, of whom 51.6% were female, age 14.9 ± 1.2 years. Most of them (87.25%) live with both parents, and 93.6% have computers at home, with 45.2% in their rooms, and a mean of 2.1 computers/home. The large majority (85.2%) have Internet at home, with 76.3% in their room. A total of 53.8% sought health information 0.71 ± 0.91 h/week, seeking mainly information on: cancer (89.9%), addictions (67.7%), STIs and HIV (49.6%), pregnancies/contraception (21, 5%), mental illness (40%), heart disease and diabetes mellitus (53.6%), and eating disorders (39.3%). Google was chosen by 63.2%, and only 11.9% chose medical websites. Information was shared on social networks by 12.8% (70.3% Facebook). The information found led to a change of behaviour in 70.7%. Just over half (56.05%) preferred to use the Internet for: speed, 34.8%, privacy, 15.8%, reliability, 13.6%, and more information, 17.6%.
conclusionsAdolescents seek information mainly through Google, with no knowledge of systems that accredit content quality, but consider it useful and reliable, changing their behaviour patterns according to the information found. All this carries a risk in this age group with very sensitive characteristics. Therefore, we believe that we should continue along the line of designing other alternative communication channels adapted to their current reality.
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.