Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33269121›Full record

ArticleCureus2020

Understanding the Use of Electronic Means to Seek Personal Health Information Among Adults in the United States.

Noara Alhusseini, Jim E Banta, Jisoo Oh, Susanne Montgomery

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

4 authors.

Noara AlhusseiniPublic Health, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, SAU.
Jim E BantaPublic Health, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, USA.
Jisoo OhPublic Health, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, USA.
Susanne MontgomeryPublic Health, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we explored who is most likely to use electronic means to seek health information and why; our research was guided by the Health Belief Model (HBM). We used the National Cancer Institute's Health Information Trends Survey (HINTS) dataset for 2017 and 2018 (n=6,697). We found that 67.5% of US adults used electronic means to seek health information and that females (52.4%), non-Hispanic whites (63.8%), those with at least some college education (76.5%), and those with a household income of at least $50,000 per year (58.3%) were most likely to do so. Respondents reporting depression were 42% more likely to use electronic means to seek health information, suggesting that stigma about mental health may direct people with depression to seek online information to avoid face-to-face communication. Using a tablet to track progress on a health-related goal [odds ratio (OR)=2.38, p<0.0001], and using a tablet to make a decision about treating an illness (OR=6.00, p<0.0001) were highly associated with seeking electronic health information. As the internet remains largely unregulated, this suggests that health systems link their patients to trustworthy resources for preventive and treatment-related information, since many already engage in internet-guided health information-seeking.

Indexed as

depressionelectronicshealth belief modelhealth informationhintsinternet

Identifiers

PMID33269121
PMCPMC7703714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.