ReviewFrontiers in public health2024
Validity evaluation of the Health Information Preferences Questionnaire among college students.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to explore the association between health information preferences and specific health behaviors and outcomes, such as preventive measures and chronic disease management among college students. It assesses how different levels of health information preference influence individuals' utilization, perception, and self-efficacy within healthcare and health information contexts. Given the rising prevalence of non-communicable chronic diseases among younger populations in China, this research seeks to understand how tailored health information preferences can support effective health education and behavioral interventions. The development of the Health Information Preference Questionnaire (HIPQ) aims to bridge the existing gap in tools for assessing health information preferences among Chinese college students, with a focus on collecting validity evidence to confirm the HIPQ's applicability in this group. Methods: The study employed a mixed-methods approach, beginning with an initial item pool derived from a comprehensive review of existing research tools, literature, and expert inputs. An expert review panel conducted item evaluations, leading to item reduction for clarity and relevance. The validation process utilized two independent samples of college students, detailing the sample size ( Results: The HIPQ, comprising 25 items across five dimensions-prevention-oriented approaches, relationship with healthcare providers, self-efficacy in obtaining health information, perception of the importance of health information, and health information behavior-demonstrated excellent content validity (ICVI ranged from 0.72 to 0.86). Factor analysis confirmed significant loadings for each item across the anticipated factors, with fit indices (RMSEA = 0.065, CFI = 0.942) supporting good model fit. The HIPQ's reliability was underscored by Cronbach's alpha coefficients (>0.8) for each subscale, with significant correlations across all subscales, indicating strong internal consistency and construct validity. Conclusion: The HIPQ proves to be a reliable and valid instrument for assessing health information preferences among Chinese college students, highlighting its potential for broader application in health education and intervention strategies. Recognizing the study's focus on a specific demographic, future research should investigate the HIPQ's adaptability and utility in broader populations and different cultural settings. The study's limitations, including its concentrated demographic and context, invite further exploration into the HIPQ's applicability across diverse groups. Additionally, potential future research directions could include longitudinal studies to assess the impact of tailored health information on actual health outcomes and behaviors.
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.