ArticlePloS one2023
An integrative review protocol on interventions to improve users' ability to identify trustworthy online health information.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An integrative systematic review on interventions to improve layperson's ability to identify trustworthy digital health information.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe epidemiological transition phenomena drive the attention to focus the scope on health literacy as it has an impact on patients' health outcomes and quality of life.
aimThis paper aims to explore the implemented interventions for improving users' ability to identify trustworthy online health information. METHODOLOGY: A comprehensive search of the literature will be conducted on the following electronic bibliographic databases: Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane database, Academic search complete and APA psycinfo. Further, manual search of eligible studies reference lists will be carried out to identify other eligible studies. The search strategy will include a combination of three key blocks of terms, namely: (adult OR adults) Or (patient OR patients) OR (layperson OR laypersons) OR (caregiver OR caregivers), (Intervention OR Interventions) OR Educational programs OR (health literacy And curriculum) OR Community outreach OR Interactive workshops OR (Online portal OR Patient Portals), and information seeking behavior OR consumer health information OR online information OR social media OR access to information. The results of these categories will then be combined using the AND connector. Two independent reviewers will screen and assess data quality. Disagreements will be resolved by consensus. Due to the anticipated methodological pluralism of the potentially eligible studies, a narrative synthesis of the findings on interventions aimed at improving users' ability to identify trustworthy online information will be provided according to the pre-identified thematic areas. Furthermore, a narrative synthesis of the reported barriers and facilitators for applying these interventions by end users. EXPECTED RESULTS AND IMPACT: Given that the focus of our review findings is on understanding the breadth and depth of the global research into interventions to improve users' ability to identify trustworthy online health information. The findings will be of great value to inform future innovative approaches to promote identification of trustable online sources for young people worldwide.
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.