ArticleHealth science reports2022
COVID-digital health literacy and subjective well-being of students in Ghana: Mediation-moderation analyses.
Article in Health science reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Moderation modelling of COVID-19 digital health literacy and sense of coherence across subjective social class and age among university students in Ghana.BMC psychology · 2023Article
- Article
- Psychological Well-Being and Resilience of Slovenian Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2023Article
- Digital health in the era of COVID-19: Reshaping the next generation of healthcare.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- COVID-digital health literacy and subjective well-being of students in Ghana: Mediation-moderation analyses.Health science reports · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous research has established a strong association between COVID-19 digital health literacy (DHL) and subjective well-being among several populations, including students. With the growing misinformation and heightened fear of COVID-19 among persons with an underlying medical condition, several scholars have questioned the direct relationship between DHL and well-being. This study assessed the moderating roles of information accuracy concerns and the existence of an underlying medical condition among students. Methods: Using a cross-sectional design, a multi-stage sampling approach was used to select 1392 students from senior high schools in Northern Ghana who completed a questionnaire containing information on DHL, information accuracy, subjective well-being, and underlying health condition, with reported internal consistency coefficients above 0.70. The data which was processed with SPSS version 25, was analyzed using correlation (Pearson and biserial), and Hayes' PROCESS for the moderation and mediation analyses. Results: A significant positive relationship was found between (a) DHL and subjective well-being, (b) DHL and information accuracy concerns, and (c) information accuracy concerns and subjective well-being. However, the prevalence of underlying health condition was negatively associated with information accuracy, DHL, and subjective well-being. Information accuracy concerns and the existence of an underlying medical condition significantly regulated the relationship between DHL and subjective well-being. Conclusions: Demonstrating satisfactory levels of DHL does not necessarily result in improved subjective well-being. However, emphasis should be placed on whether individuals attach much importance to the accuracy of information retrieved as well as having or not an underlying health condition.
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.