ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024
eHealth Literacy and the Use of NHS 111 Online Urgent Care Service in England: Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Use of a digital health navigator in the emergency department: experiences and acceptance among patients and physicians].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Article
- Patient-centred care: is it enough?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2026Article
- Measuring eHealth Literacy in the European Economic Area, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Continuity of care in UK primary care: a scoping review of measures, challenges, and future interventions.Primary health care research & development · 2026Article
- Factors Influencing the Use of Online Symptom Checkers in the United Kingdom: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Accuracy of online symptom assessment applications, large language models, and laypeople for self-triage decisions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Rethinking the digital divide in health: a critical interpretive synthesis of research literature.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany health care systems have used digital technologies to support care delivery, a trend amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic. "Digital first" may exacerbate health inequalities due to variations in eHealth literacy. The relationship between eHealth literacy and web-based urgent care service use is unknown.
objectiveThis study aims to measure the association between eHealth literacy and the use of NHS (National Health Service) 111 online urgent care service.
methodsA cross-sectional sequential convenience sample survey was conducted with 2754 adults (October 2020-July 2021) from primary, urgent, or emergency care; third sector organizations; and the NHS 111 online website. The survey included the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ), questions about use, preferences for using NHS 111 online, and sociodemographic characteristics.
resultsAcross almost all dimensions of the eHLQ, NHS 111 online users had higher mean digital literacy scores than nonusers (P<.001). Four eHLQ dimensions were significant predictors of use, and the most highly significant dimensions were eHLQ1 (using technology to process health information) and eHLQ3 (ability to actively engage with digital services), with odds ratios (ORs) of 1.86 (95% CI 1.46-2.38) and 1.51 (95% CI 1.22-1.88), respectively. Respondents reporting a long-term health condition had lower eHLQ scores. People younger than 25 years (OR 3.24, 95% CI 1.87-5.62) and those with formal qualifications (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99) were more likely to use NHS 111 online. Users and nonusers were likely to use NHS 111 online for a range of symptoms, including chest pain symptoms (n=1743, 70.4%) or for illness in children (n=1117, 79%). The users of NHS 111 online were more likely to have also used other health services, particularly the 111 telephone service (χ
conclusionsThese differences in eHealth literacy scores amplify perennial concerns about digital exclusion and access to care for those impacted by intersecting forms of disadvantage, including long-term illness. Although many appear willing to use NHS 111 online for a range of health scenarios, indicating broad acceptability, not all are able or likely to do this. Despite a policy ambition for NHS 111 online to substitute for other services, it appears to be used alongside other urgent care services and thus may not reduce demand.
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.