Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36757773›Full record

ArticleJMIR aging2023

Individualistic Versus Collaborative Learning in an eHealth Literacy Intervention for Older Adults: Quasi-Experimental Study.

Christian Elias Vazquez, Bo Xie, Kristina Shiroma, Neil Charness

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR aging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. The level of electronic health literacy among older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. eHealth Literacy Interventions: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Christian Elias VazquezSchool of Social Work, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3792-9150
Bo XieSchool of Nursing, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6016-6008
Kristina ShiromaSchool of Information, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2348-002X
Neil CharnessDepartment of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1002-3439

Funding

Improving Older Adults' E-Health Literacy With Collaborative Versus IndividualistR01AG041284 · NIA · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI XIE, BO · 2011 to 2013
$876k
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG041284
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlder adults tend to have insufficient health literacy, which includes eHealth literacy-the ability to access, assess, and use digital health information. Interventions using methods such as collaborative learning (CL) and individualistic learning (IL) may be effective in addressing older adults' low eHealth literacy, but little is known about the short- and long-term effects of CL versus IL on older adults' eHealth literacy.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to use a 3 × 2 × 3 mixed factorial design to examine older adults' learning with CL versus IL for eHealth literacy.

methodsOlder adults (N=466; mean age 70.5, SD 7.2; range 60-96 years) from diverse racial and ethnic groups were randomly assigned to either the CL or IL group (233/466, 50% in each). The intervention consisted of 4 weeks of training in 2-hour sessions held twice a week. Using ANOVA and multiple regression, we focused on the main effects of learning condition and interaction between learning condition and previous computer experience. Learning method (CL or IL) and previous computer experience (experienced, new, or mixed) were between-subject variables, and time of measurement (pretest measurement, posttest measurement, and 6-month follow-up) was the within-subject variable. Primary outcome variables were eHealth literacy efficacy, computer and web knowledge, basic computer and web operation skills, information-seeking skills, and website evaluation skills. Control variables were age, sex, education, health status, race and ethnicity, income, primary language, and previous health literacy.

resultseHealth literacy efficacy, computer and web knowledge, basic computer and web operation skills, information-seeking skills, and website evaluation skills improved significantly (P<.001 in all cases) from before to after the intervention. From postintervention measurement to 6-month follow-up, there was a significant interaction between learning condition and previous computer experience based on 1 outcome measure, computer and web operation skills (F

conclusionsOlder adults' eHealth literacy can be improved through effective intervention, and the IL or CL condition may have little effect on short-term outcomes. However, to maintain long-term benefits, it may be best to learn collaboratively with others who have similar previous computer experience. eHealth literacy is multidimensional, with some components retained better over time. Findings suggest a need for resources to provide continuous training or periodic boosting to maintain intervention gains.

Indexed as

agingdigital literacyeHealtheHealth literacyhealth informationolder adultsweb-based information

Identifiers

PMID36757773
PMCPMC9951071

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.