Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39825311›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

eHealth literacy in the general population: a cross-sectional study in China.

Chao Sun, Eline Meijer, Niels H Chavannes, Huohuo Dai, Xiao Li, Yue Wang, Liangqiuhe Wu, Qing Zhang, Marise J Kasteleyn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Patient acceptance of video consultations in cardiology.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

9 authors.

Chao SunDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Centre, Hippocratespad 21, Leiden, Netherlands. c.sun@lumc.nl.
Eline MeijerDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Centre, Hippocratespad 21, Leiden, Netherlands.
Niels H ChavannesDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Centre, Hippocratespad 21, Leiden, Netherlands.
Huohuo DaiDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Centre, Hippocratespad 21, Leiden, Netherlands.
Xiao LiSchool of Nursing, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Yue WangSchool of Nursing, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Liangqiuhe WuSchool of Nursing, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Qing ZhangSchool of Nursing, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Marise J KasteleynDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Centre, Hippocratespad 21, Leiden, Netherlands.

Funding

China Scholarship Council 202206270012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundeHealth literacy (eHL) is positively associated with health-related behaviors and outcomes. Previous eHL studies primarily collected data from online users and seldom focused on the general population in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Additionally, knowledge about factors that affect eHL is limited. Chronic lung disease (CLD) has brought a large burden in LMIC, making it a relevant example for studying eHL. This study aims to explore eHL and its associated factors within the general population of China, encompassing sociodemographic characteristics, CLD knowledge, digital access, eHealth use and attitudes towards eHealth.

methodData were collected from November 2023 to January 2024 via online and hard-copy questionnaires among the general population in China. Descriptive analyses were performed to explore eHL, CLD knowledge, digital access, and attitudes towards eHealth at different sociodemographic levels. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with eHL.

results439 valid questionnaires were collected. Participants demonstrated a mean eHL of 24.7 ± 8.2 and CLD knowledge of 5.9 ± 3.7, obtained a score of 6.9 ± 1.8 in attitudes towards eHealth. A notable percentage of participants (45/439, 10.3%) reported no digital access, especially those aged 66+, the unemployed, retired, those with a primary school or below degree and earning ≤ 1500 RMB monthly. Multivariable hierarchical regression analysis showed higher eHL was uniquely associated with younger age (b=-0.10, P < .001), higher educational level (b = 2.02, P < .001), higher income (b = 1.10, P < .001), having digital access (b = 6.35, P < .001), more frequent eHealth use (b = 1.14, P < .001), and more positive attitudes towards eHealth (b = 0.47, P = .003).

conclusionOur sample from the general population in China had a relatively low eHL and CLD knowledge level, but held a positive attitudes towards eHealth. A digital divide was noticed between the elderly, low socioeconomic population and other groups. Younger age, higher educational and income level, having digital access, more frequent eHealth use and more positive attitudes towards eHealth were significantly associated with higher eHL. Efforts at both individual and systematic levels should be made to improve eHL, and promote CLD knowledge and digital access, especially in disadvantaged populations. Moreover, there is a pressing need to develop and refine national and international standards for eHL.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth LiteracyTelemedicineAdolescentAdultAgedChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLung DiseasesMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultAttitudeChronic lung diseaseDigital accessDigital divideeHealth literacyGeneral populationKnowledge

Identifiers

PMID39825311
PMCPMC11742792

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.