ArticleJMIR infodemiology2025
A Model of Trust in Online COVID-19 Information and Advice: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.
Article in JMIR infodemiology, 2025. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, many people sought information from websites and social media. Understanding the extent to which these sources were trusted is important in relation to health communication.
objectiveThis study aims to identify the key factors influencing UK citizens' trust and intention to act on advice about COVID-19 found via digital resources and to test whether an existing model of trust in eHealth provided a good fit for COVID-19-related information seeking online. We also wished to identify any differences between the evaluation of general information and information relating specifically to COVID-19 vaccines.
methodsIn total, 525 people completed an online survey in January 2022 encompassing a general web trust questionnaire, measures of information corroboration, coping perceptions, and intention to act. Data were analyzed using principal component analysis and structural equation modeling. The evaluation responses of general information and COVID-19 vaccine information were also compared.
resultsThe principal component analysis revealed 5 trust factors: (1) credibility and impartiality, (2) familiarity, (3) privacy, (4) usability, and (5) personal experiences. In the final structural equation modeling model, trust had a significant direct effect on intention to act (β=.65; P<.001). Of the trust factors, credibility and impartiality had a significant positive direct effect on trust (β=.82; P<.001). People searching for vaccination information felt less at risk, less anxious, and more optimistic after reading the information. We noted that most people sought information from "official" sources. Finally, in the context of COVID-19, "credibility and impartiality" remain a key predictor of trust in eHealth resources, but in comparison with previous models of trust in online health information, checking and corroborating information did not form a significant part of trust evaluations.
conclusionsIn times of uncertainty, when faced with a global emergent health concern, people place their trust in familiar websites and rely on the perceived credibility and impartiality of those digital sources above other trust factors.
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.