ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Exploring trust dynamics in health information systems: the impact of patients' health conditions on information source preferences.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Communicating Risk in the Age of Misinformation: Empirical Frameworks for Understanding Stakeholder Trust.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026Article
- Perception-reality gap profiles in robot-assisted gynecologic surgery: implications for preoperative counseling among Chinese women.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Observational
- Contemporary perceptions of ginseng among individuals with health needs: A nationwide questionnaire survey.Journal of ginseng research · 2026Article
- Evaluating patients' trust in health information based on different dimensions of trust.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Bridging perception and reality: understanding Chinese women's behavioral intentions toward robot-assisted gynecologic surgery.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Awareness and acceptance of malaria vaccines by caregivers of under-5 children in Abia State, Nigeria: a mixed methods study.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Therapeutic Vaccines for Non-Communicable Diseases: Global Progress and China's Deployment Pathways.Vaccines · 2025Review
- The Effects of Patients' Health Information Behaviors on Shared Decision-Making: Evaluating the Role of Patients' Trust in Physicians.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Health Information Use and Trust: The Role of Health Literacy and Patient Activation in a Multilingual European Region.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- How low-income adults in China perceive health and health management mobile applications.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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Health information systems (HISs) should provide accessible and high-quality information to patients. However, the challenge lies in understanding patients' trust preferences for health information. This study explores how different information sources (e.g., online platforms, interpersonal sources) are trusted under varying health conditions, focusing on symptom intensity and disease type. Methods: Using a 2 × 2 × 4 between-subject design, 243 participants from a US college were presented with vignettes of acute or chronic diseases with varying symptom intensities and information sources. Participants rated their trust levels, including both cognitive and behavioral trust, in the health information and recommendations provided by one of the information sources, which was randomly assigned. Logistic regression and ANOVA were employed for the statistical analysis. Results: The analysis results revealed that trust is generally higher for interpersonal sources like doctors and family/friends compared to online sources like WebMD and Wikipedia when patients are making health decisions. Doctors are the most trusted source during health-related decision making. However, there are no significant differences in cognitive trust among interpersonal sources or among online sources. Furthermore, symptom intensity and disease type did not significantly alter trust levels across various information sources. These findings suggest that people prefer professional medical advice regardless of their health conditions. Discussion: The study highlights the need for HIS to incorporate features that provide "doctor-verified" information and promote interactive engagement to enhance patients' trust in information source. Additionally, it distinguishes between cognitive and behavioral trust, revealing distinct trust patterns that can inform the strategic development of HIS for varied health conditions. Understanding these trust dynamics can inform the design of effective, patient-centered HIS that better support health education, information seeking, and decision-making.
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.