Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37792773›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Determinants and outcomes of eHealth literacy in healthy adults: A systematic review.

Ariesta Milanti, Dorothy Ngo Sheung Chan, Anselmus Aristo Parut, Winnie Kwok Wei So

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. eHealth literacy in emergency care: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  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

4 authors.

Ariesta MilantiThe Nethersole School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3958-9708
Dorothy Ngo Sheung ChanThe Nethersole School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6848-9947
Anselmus Aristo ParutIndependent Scholar, Labuan Bajo, Flores, Indonesia.
Winnie Kwok Wei SoThe Nethersole School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9243-2924

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundeHealth has shown many benefits in health promotion and disease prevention. For engaging in and taking advantage of eHealth, eHealth literacy is essential. This systematic review aims to summarise and examine the existing evidence on determinants and outcomes of eHealth literacy in healthy adults.

methodsWe searched the relevant peer-reviewed articles published in English in six databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and ProQuest. The inclusion criteria of the review were: 1) studies examining 'eHealth literacy', which refers to the ability to search, select, judge and apply online health information to address or solve health problems and to improve wellbeing; 2) the type of study included observational and experimental studies, mixed method studies or qualitative studies; 3) the participants were healthy adults; 4) the main outcomes were the determinants (i.e. influencing or associated factors) and outcomes (i.e. benefits and disadvantages) of eHealth literacy. Articles were assessed by two reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. A conceptual model to map the determinants and outcomes of eHealth literacy in healthy adults into the non-modifiable, individual, social and community networks and structural layers was developed to classify the identified determinants and outcomes.

resultsForty-four studies were included in this review, of which 43 studies were cross-sectional and one was qualitative. eHealth literacy determinants included age, sex, literacy factors, socioeconomic factors and language. eHealth literacy outcomes included better general health promotion behavior, COVID-19 preventive behaviors, psychological wellbeing, social support, self-rated health and health service utilisation.

conclusionsOur results showed that eHealth literacy has multi-layered determinants and positive outcomes. Different strategies at different policy levels are needed to improve the eHealth literacy levels of healthy adults.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health LiteracyTelemedicineAdultHealth PromotionHumans

Identifiers

PMID37792773
PMCPMC10550189

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.