Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35974395›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2022

Validation of the German eHealth impact questionnaire for online health information users affected by multiple sclerosis.

Anna Sippel, Karin Riemann-Lorenz, Jana Pöttgen, Renate Wiedemann, Karin Drixler, Eva Maria Bitzer, Christine Holmberg, Susanne Lezius, Christoph Heesen

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2022. 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
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Anna SippelInstitute of Neuroimmunology and Multiple Sclerosis, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. a.sippel@uke.de.
Karin Riemann-LorenzInstitute of Neuroimmunology and Multiple Sclerosis, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Jana PöttgenInstitute of Neuroimmunology and Multiple Sclerosis, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Renate WiedemannUniversity of Education Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Karin DrixlerUniversity of Education Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Eva Maria BitzerUniversity of Education Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Christine HolmbergInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany.
Susanne LeziusInstitute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Christoph HeesenInstitute of Neuroimmunology and Multiple Sclerosis, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Universität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Education Freiburg · DEUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DEMedizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPersons with multiple sclerosis (MS) are confronted by an overwhelming amount of online health information, which can be valuable but also vary in quality and aim. Therefore, it is of great importance for developers and providers of eHealth information to understand its impact on the users. The eHealth Impact Questionnaire (eHIQ) has been developed in the United Kingdom to measure the potential effects of health and experimental information websites. This contains user's general attitudes towards using the internet to gain health information and attitudes towards a specific health related website. The self-complete questionnaire is divided into two independently administered and scored parts: the 11-item eHIQ part 1 and the 26-item eHIQ part 2. This study aimed to validate the psychometric properties of the German version of the eHealth Impact Questionnaire (eHIQ-G).

methods162 people with multiple sclerosis browsed one of two possible websites containing information on MS and completed an online survey. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's alpha and structural validity by Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Construct validity was examined by assessing correlations with the reference instruments eHealth Literacy Questionnaire and the General Self-Efficacy Scale measuring related, but dissimilar constructs. Moreover, we investigated the mean difference of the eHIQ-G score between the two websites. Data were analyzed using SPSS and AMOS software.

resultsThe eHIQ-G subscales showed high internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha from 0.833 to 0.885. The 2-factor model of eHIQ part 1 achieved acceptable levels of goodness-of-fit indices, whereas the fit for the 3-factor model of eHIQ part 2 was poor and likewise for the alternative modified models. The correlations with the reference instruments were 0.08-0.62 and as expected. Older age was related with lower eHIQ part 1 score, whereas no significant effect was found for education on eHIQ part 1. Although not significant, the website 'AMSEL' reached higher mean scores on eHIQ part 2.

conclusionsThe eHIQ-G has good internal consistency, and sufficient structural and construct validity. This instrument will facilitate the measurement of the potential impact of eHealth tools.

Indexed as

Health LiteracyMultiple SclerosisTelemedicineGermanyHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomeHealthEmpowermentFactor analysisMultiple sclerosisPatient informationPsychometrics

Identifiers

PMID35974395
PMCPMC9380659
OpenAlexW4292064564

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.