Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40150466›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025

eHealth Literacy and Trust in Health Information Sources.

Abdullah Alhewiti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author.

Abdullah AlhewitiDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tabuk, Tabuk 71491, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-2976-8254

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe spread of health-related information across the internet necessitates an evaluation of public eHealth literacy, trust in different health information sources, including healthcare providers, and how eHealth literacy is related to trust in different sources.

methods407 individuals participated in a web-based survey in the Tabuk region of Saudi Arabia. Univariate analysis was used to evaluate the relationships between eHealth literacy and demographic variables, and multiple linear regression was used to measure the relationship between eHealth literacy and trust in health information sources after adjustment for demographic factors.

resultsThe average eHealth literacy of the respondents was 27.17 out of 40. eHealth literacy levels were higher among females, younger age groups, those in the higher-education category, and those with a chronic disease or currently on medication. For 51.9% of participants, physicians and healthcare workers were their main source of health information, while 40% considered the internet their main source. None of the study participants perceived physicians and healthcare workers as untrustworthy, and social media was the least trusted source. eHealth literacy was not related to trust in physicians and health workers but was positively associated with trust in specialized health websites and negatively associated with trust in social media.

conclusionsThe findings suggest that the public tends to prefer and trust physicians and other healthcare workers as a primary source of health information, regardless of their eHealth literacy levels. A higher eHealth literacy level was associated with trust in specialized health websites and distrust in social media.

Indexed as

eHealth literacyhealthcare providershealthcare workershealth informationinternettrust

Identifiers

PMID40150466
PMCPMC11942269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.