ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
Only the anxious ones? Identifying characteristics of symptom checker app users: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring eHealth Literacy in the European Economic Area, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Evaluating adult digital health literacy, 2020-2025: A systematic review.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Article
- Accuracy of online symptom assessment applications, large language models, and laypeople for self-triage decisions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Exploring Laypersons' Experiences With a Mobile Symptom Checker App as an Interface Between eHealth Literacy, Health Literacy, and Health-Related Behavior: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Unveiling Usage Patterns and Explaining Usage of Symptom Checker Apps: Explorative Longitudinal Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- "That's just Future Medicine" - a qualitative study on users' experiences of symptom checker apps.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Trust, perceived accuracy, and continued use of patient-facing symptom monitoring applications: Cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSymptom checker applications (SCAs) may help laypeople classify their symptoms and receive recommendations on medically appropriate actions. Further research is necessary to estimate the influence of user characteristics, attitudes and (e)health-related competencies.
objectiveThe objective of this study is to identify meaningful predictors for SCA use considering user characteristics.
methodsAn explorative cross-sectional survey was conducted to investigate German citizens' demographics, eHealth literacy, hypochondria, self-efficacy, and affinity for technology using German language-validated questionnaires. A total of 869 participants were eligible for inclusion in the study. As n = 67 SCA users were assessed and matched 1:1 with non-users, a sample of n = 134 participants were assessed in the main analysis. A four-step analysis was conducted involving explorative predictor selection, model comparisons, and parameter estimates for selected predictors, including sensitivity and post hoc analyses.
resultsHypochondria and self-efficacy were identified as meaningful predictors of SCA use. Hypochondria showed a consistent and significant effect across all analyses OR: 1.24-1.26 (95% CI: 1.1-1.4). Self-efficacy OR: 0.64-0.93 (95% CI: 0.3-1.4) showed inconsistent and nonsignificant results, leaving its role in SCA use unclear. Over half of the SCA users in our sample met the classification for hypochondria (cut-off on the WI of 5).
conclusionsHypochondria has emerged as a significant predictor of SCA use with a consistently stable effect, yet according to the literature, individuals with this trait may be less likely to benefit from SCA despite their greater likelihood of using it. These users could be further unsettled by risk-averse triage and unlikely but serious diagnosis suggestions.
trial registrationThe study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) DRKS00022465, DERR1- https://doi.org/10.2196/34026 .
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.