ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019
A Revised Model of Trust in Internet-Based Health Information and Advice: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Internet-Based Communication for Public Health: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Consumers' Evaluation of Web-Based Health Information Quality: Meta-analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Pooled it
- Effects of Social Media Narratives on Affective and Behavioral Responses to Menopause Content: Randomized Online Experimental Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Trial
- Assessing the Effect of Nonvisual Information Factors in Pandemic-Related Video Communication: Randomized Controlled Between-Subjects Experiment.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Trial
- Use of the Online Portal "Embryotox" in Routine Health Care: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- [The internet as a source of health information: results of a household survey in Brazilian municipalities in the South and Central-West regions].Cadernos de saude publica · 2026Article
- Evolving Health Information-Seeking Behavior in the Context of Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT, and Alexa: Interview Study Using the Think-Aloud Protocol.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Developing a Framework for Online Review-Based Health Care Service Quality Assessment: Text-Mining Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Content and Quality of Videos Related to Hypertrophic Scarring on TikTok in China: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Acceptability of a Brief Web-Based Alcohol Misuse Prevention Program Among US Military Cadets: Mixed Methods Formative Evaluation.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- A Model of Trust in Online COVID-19 Information and Advice: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- The impact of health information seeking and social influence on functional food purchase intention.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A New Research Model for Artificial Intelligence-Based Well-Being Chatbot Engagement: Survey Study.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
- Automated Credibility Assessment of Web-Based Health Information Considering Health on the Net Foundation Code of Conduct (HONcode): Model Development and Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- How do patients with high cardiovascular risk evaluate online health information? A qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2023Article
- People with long-term conditions sharing personal health data via digital health technologies: A scoping review to inform design.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- Supporting mental health self-care discovery through a chatbot.Frontiers in digital health · 2023Article
- Demands on Health Information and Clinical Practice Guidelines for Patients from the Perspective of Adults with Mental Illness and Family Members: A Qualitative Study with In-Depth Interviews.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Usability Testing of a Digital Assessment Routing Tool for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Iterative, Convergent Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Quality Assessment of YouTube Videos as an Information Source for Testicular Torsion.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe internet continues to offer new forms of support for health decision making. Government, charity, and commercial websites increasingly offer a platform for shared personal health experiences, and these are just some of the opportunities that have arisen in a largely unregulated arena. Understanding how people trust and act on this information has always been an important issue and remains so, particularly as the design practices of health websites continue to evolve and raise further concerns regarding their trustworthiness.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to identify the key factors influencing US and UK citizens' trust and intention to act on advice found on health websites and to understand the role of patient experiences.
methodsA total of 1123 users took part in an online survey (625 from the United States and 498 from the United Kingdom). They were asked to recall their previous visit to a health website. The online survey consisted of an updated general Web trust questionnaire to account for personal experiences plus questions assessing key factors associated with trust in health websites (information corroboration and coping perception) and intention to act. We performed principal component analysis (PCA), then explored the relationship between the factor structure and outcomes by testing the fit to the sampled data using structural equation modeling (SEM). We also explored the model fit across US and UK populations.
resultsPCA of the general Web trust questionnaire revealed 4 trust factors: (1) personal experiences, (2) credibility and impartiality, (3) privacy, and (4) familiarity. In the final SEM model, trust was found to have a significant direct effect on intention to act (beta=.59; P<.001), and of the trust factors, only credibility and impartiality had a significant direct effect on trust (beta=.79; P<.001). The impact of personal experiences on trust was mediated through information corroboration (beta=.06; P=.04). Variables specific to electronic health (eHealth; information corroboration and coping) were found to substantially improve the model fit, and differences in information corroboration were found between US and UK samples. The final model accounting for all factors achieved a good fit (goodness-of-fit index [0.95], adjusted goodness-of-fit index [0.93], root mean square error of approximation [0.50], and comparative fit index [0.98]) and explained 65% of the variance in trust and 41% of the variance in intention to act.
conclusionsCredibility and impartiality continue to be key predictors of trust in eHealth websites. Websites with patient experiences can positively influence trust but only if users first corroborate the information through other sources. The need for corroboration was weaker in the United Kingdom, where website familiarity reduced the need to check information elsewhere. These findings are discussed in relation to existing trust models, patient experiences, and health literacy.
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.