Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34813493›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2021

Digitization and Health in Germany: Cross-sectional Nationwide Survey.

Karina Karolina De Santis, Tina Jahnel, Elida Sina, Julian Wienert, Hajo Zeeb

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Low income and health literacy: a systematic scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Attitudes of dermatological patients towards digital health interventions: a cross-sectional survey and cluster analysis.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2026
    Article
  6. Digital Transformation in Health Care: Are We on the Right Track?Journal of medical Internet research · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. [Relevance of eHealth Literacy (eHL) for health services research and practice - Part II].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Karina Karolina De SantisDepartment of Prevention and Evaluation, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology-BIPS, Bremen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7647-6767
Tina JahnelLeibniz Science Campus Digital Public Health, Bremen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8367-4574
Elida SinaLeibniz Science Campus Digital Public Health, Bremen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2926-2480
Julian WienertDepartment of Prevention and Evaluation, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology-BIPS, Bremen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1246-7591
Hajo ZeebDepartment of Prevention and Evaluation, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology-BIPS, Bremen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7509-242X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital technologies are shaping medicine and public health.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the attitudes toward and the use of digital technologies for health-related purposes using a nationwide survey.

methodsWe performed a cross-sectional study using a panel sample of internet users selected from the general population living in Germany. Responses to a survey with 28 items were collected using computer-assisted telephone interviews conducted in October 2020. The items were divided into four topics: (1) general attitudes toward digitization, (2) COVID-19 pandemic, (3) physical activity, and (4) perceived digital health (eHealth) literacy measured with the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS; sum score of 8=lowest to 40=highest perceived eHealth literacy). The data were analyzed in IBM-SPSS24 using relative frequencies. Three univariate multiple regression analyses (linear or binary logistic) were performed to investigate the associations among the sociodemographic factors (age, gender, education, and household income) and digital technology use.

resultsThe participants included 1014 internet users (n=528, 52.07% women) aged 14 to 93 years (mean 54, SD 17). Among all participants, 66.47% (674/1014) completed up to tertiary (primary and secondary) education and 45.07% (457/1017) reported a household income of up to 3500 Euro/month (1 Euro=US $1.18). Over half (579/1014, 57.10%) reported having used digital technologies for health-related purposes. The majority (898/1014, 88.56%) noted that digitization will be important for therapy and health care, in the future. Only 25.64% (260/1014) reported interest in smartphone apps for health promotion/prevention and 42.70% (433/1014) downloaded the COVID-19 contact-tracing app. Although 52.47% (532/1014) reported that they come across inaccurate digital information on the COVID-19 pandemic, 78.01% (791/1014) were confident in their ability to recognize such inaccurate information. Among those who use digital technologies for moderate physical activity (n=220), 187 (85.0%) found such technologies easy to use and 140 (63.6%) reported using them regularly (at least once a week). Although the perceived eHealth literacy was high (eHEALS mean score 31 points, SD 6), less than half (43.10%, 400/928) were confident in using digital information for health decisions. The use of digital technologies for health was associated with higher household income (odds ratio [OR] 1.28, 95% CI 1.11-1.47). The use of digital technologies for physical activity was associated with younger age (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.94-0.96) and more education (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.46). A higher perceived eHealth literacy score was associated with younger age (β=-.22, P<.001), higher household income (β=.21, P<.001), and more education (β=.14, P<.001).

conclusionsInternet users in Germany expect that digitization will affect preventive and therapeutic health care in the future. The facilitators and barriers associated with the use of digital technologies for health warrant further research. A gap exists between high confidence in the perceived ability to evaluate digital information and low trust in internet-based information on the COVID-19 pandemic and health decisions.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health LiteracyCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGermanyHumansMalePandemicsSARS-CoV-2attitudeCOVID-19digital healtheHEALSgeneral populationliteracymisinformationphysical activitysurveyusage

Identifiers

PMID34813493
PMCPMC8612128

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.